TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Charles Rose
Docket Number: 11790-16S
Judge: Nega
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 04/26/2017
Pages: 9

JRN UNITED STATES TAX COURT WASHINGTON, DC 20217 CHARLESROSE, Petitioner(s), v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent ) ) ) ) ) Docket No. 11790-16S. ) ) ) ) ORDER Pursuant to Rule 152(b) of the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, it is ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall transmit to petitioner and to respondent a copy of the pages of the transcript of the proceedings in the above case before Judge Joseph W. Nega at Shreveport, Louisiana, on April 13, 2017, containing his oral findings of fact and opinion rendered at the trial session at which the case was heard. In accordance with the oral findings of fact and opinion, decision will be entered under Rule 155. (Signed) Joseph W. Nega Judge Dated: Washington, D.C. April 26, 2017 SERVED Apr 27 2017 . . (cid:16)042 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 . Capital Reporting Company IN THE UNITED STATES TAX COURT 1 In the Matter of: CHARLES ROSE, Petitioner, v. . COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ) ) ) ) ) ) Docket No: 11790-16S ) ) Respondent. ) Courtroom #5, 1st Floor U.S. Tax Court 300 Fannin Street Shreveport, Louisiana 71101 April 13s 2017 The above-entitled matter came on for bench opinion, pursuant to notice at 1:02 p.m. BEFORE: HONORABLE JOSEPH W. NEGA Judge APP,EARANCES: For, the Petitioner: (NO APPEARANÖE) For the Respondent: (NO APPEARANCE) 866.488.DEPO www.CapitailleportingCompany.com Càpital Reporting Company P R O C E E D. I N G S (1:02 p.m. ) THE CLERK: Recïalling from the calendar Docket. Nufnber 11790-16S, Charles Rose. (Whereúpon, a bench opinion was rendered. ) 1 2 3 4 5 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 . 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 866.488.DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com Capital Reporting Company 3 1 Bench Opinion by Judge Joseph W. Nega 2 April 13, 2017 3 Charles Rose v. Commissioner 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Docket No. 11790-16s THE COURT: The Court has decided to render oral findings of fact and opinion in this case, and the following represents the Court's oral findings of fact and opinion. The oral findings of fact and opinion shall not be relied upon as precedent in any other case. In this Bench Opinion, all citations are to sections, unless otherwise noted, òf the Internal Revenue Code (Code) in effect for them pear at issue, and all citation* ·to Rules. are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Pr.ocedure.. This case was heard 15. pursuant to the provisions of Section 7463 and Rules . 16 17 18 170 through 17'4, and this opinion is rendered pursuant to Section 7459(b) and Rule 152. Pursuant to Section 7463(b), the decision to be entered is not .19 . reviewable by any other court, and this opinion shall 20 21 22 23 24 -not be treated as precedent for any other. case. Petitioner Charles Rose appeared pro se. Emile L. Hebert, III; appeared on behalf of the Respondent. This case was tried on April 13th, 2017, in Shreveport, Louisiana. Respondent concedes that 25 Petitioner for tax year 2014 is entitled to (1) a 866.488.DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com Capital Reporting Company 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 dependency exemption for his daughter Jessica Davis and for R.S., a minor child; (2) to claim both Jessica and R.S. as his qualifying children for computing an earned income credit; and (3) a child tax credit/additional child tax credit for R.S.; and (4) head of household filing status. The sole issue for decision is whether 8 Petitioner is entitled to the refundable or 9 nonrefundable American Opportunity Credit in 10 11 12 of the parties' stipulations for 2014. FINDINGS OF FACT Some of the facts are stipulated and are so (cid:16)04213found. The stipulation of facts and the attached 14 exhibits are incorporated here and by reference. . 15 Petitioner resided in Louisiana when the petition was 16 17 18 filed. On March 25th, 2016, the Internal Revenue Service mailed Petitioner a notibe of deficiency for tax year 2014 that, among other things, disallowed 19 Petitioner's claimed $4,000 American -Opportunity 20 Credit and determined a deficiency of $8,014. 21 22 23 24 Petitioner timely filed a petition for redetermination of the deficiency. In light of the sole issue for decision, the parties have stipulated that Jessica was a full-time student.at Grambling 25 University during 2014 and Jessica had qualified 866.488.DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com . Capital Reporting Company 5 tuition and related expenses of $6,200 and received $6, 187 in scholarships. and grants during 2014 as reflected on Form '1098-T, tuition statement, issued to Jessica. I. Burden of proof .OPINION The Commissioner's determinations in a notice of deficiency are generally presumed correct,, and the taxpayer ordinarily bears the burden of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 proving. those determinations erroneous . Rule 142 ( a) ; 11 Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933) . 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Deductions are a matter of legislative grace; the taxpayer bears the burden of proving entitlement to deductions allowed by the Code and of substantiating expenses underlying his claimed deductions by keeping and producing records sufficient to enable the Commissioner to determine the correct tax liability. Sec. 6001; INDOPCO, Inc. v Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992); New Colonial Ice Co. v. Commissioner, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1935); sec. 1.6001-1(a), (e), Income Tax Regs. 22· II. American Opportunity Credit. 23 The American apportunity Credit is a 24 modified version of the Hope Scholarship Credit and 25 is in effect for tax years 2009 through 2018. Sec. 866.488.DEPO www.Capita1ReportingCompany.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Capital Reporting Company 25A(i). American Opportunity Credit provides for a credit against tax equal to *(a) 100 percent of GWid so much of the qualified tuition and related expenses paid by the taxpayer during the year as does not exceed $2, 000 plus (b) 25 percent of such expenses so paid as exceeds 2,000 but does not exceed $4,000." Id. Ch. The credit phases out for a single taxpayer whose modified adjusted gross income exceeds $80,000 or $160,000 for married taxpayers filing joint returns. Id. stv(cid:16)060(M . The maximum amount of the credit is thus $2,500 per year. Up to 40 percent of the credit is made refundable for a .maximum refundable credit of $1,000. ·See I Paragraph 6. As stipulated by the parties, Jessica' s qualified tuition and related expenses exceed the amouñt of scholarships and grants by $13. Petitioner now contends that Jessica paid $850 for books (a related expense); however, notwithstanding the testintoñy öf Petitioñer' s wife, Petitióner has not introduced adequate evidence .to substantiate the $850 claimed related expenses for books nor any qualified tuition and related expenses in excess of that stipulated by the parties. Accordingly, Petitioner 866.488.DEPO www.Capita1ReportingCompany.com . Capitál Reporting Company 7 1 2 3 4 5 is not entitled to a refundable or nonrefundable American Opportunity Credit in excess of , the amount allowed by the parties' stipulétions. III. Conclusion Accordingly, .a decision will be entered under 6 Rule 155. This concludes the Court' s oral findings 7, of facts and opinion in this case. In reaching our 8 9 holdings herein, we have considered all arguments made by the parties and to the extent not mentioned 10 abòve find those arguments are moot, irrelevant, or 11 without merit. 12 13 .14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 . (Whereupon, at 1:09 p.m., the above- entitled matter was concluded.) 866.488.DEPO www.CapitsilkeportingCompany.com Capital Reporting Company 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIBER AND PROOFREADER CASE NAME: Charles Rose va Commissioner DOCKET NO.: 11790-16S We the undersigned, do hereby certify.that the foregoing pages, numbers 1 through 8, inclusive, are the true, accurate and complete transcript prepared from the verbal recording made by electronic recording by Stephanie Novak, on April 13, 2017, before the Unitéd States Tax Court at its session in . . 10 Shreveport, Louisiana, in accordance with the 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 applicable provlsions of the current verbatim reporting contract of the Court, and have verified the accur.acy of the transcript .by comparing 5the typewritten transcript against the verbal recording. Lisa Beauchamp 4/17/17 (Transcriber) (Date) (WJL Connie F. Armstrong 4/18/17 (Proofreader) (Date) 866.488.DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com