TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Lindsay Dawn Hernandez
Docket Number: 25957-10S
Judge: Whalen
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 06/06/2011
Pages: 7

UNITED STATES TAX COURT WASHINGTON, DC 20217 LINDSAY DAWN HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent. . ) ) ) ) ) Docket No. 25957-10S ) ) ) ) O R D E R Pursuant to Rule 152(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, it is ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall transmit herewith the pages of the to petitioner and to respondent a copy of transcript of Laurence J. Whalen at Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, containing his oral the proceedings in the above case before Judge fact and opinion rendered on May 19, 2011. findings of In accordance with the oral findings of fact and opinion, decision will be entered for respondent. (Signed) Laurence J. Whalen Judge Dated: Washington, D.C. June 6, 2011 8ERVED JUN - 7 2011 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 Bench Opinion by Senior Judge Laurence J. Whalen May 19, 2011 Hernandez v. Commissioner Docket No. 25957-10S 2 I. THE COURT HAS DECIDED TO RENDER L J W ORAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION IN THIS CASE, AND THE FOLLOWING REPRESENTS THE COURT'S ORAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION. II. This case was heard as a Small Tax Case pursuant to the provisions of- section 7463 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and Rules 170 through 179 of the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. Hereinafter all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended and in effect for 2009, the taxable year in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. III. This bench opinion is made pursuant to the authority granted by section 7459(b) and Rule 152. This opinion is not to be cited as authority, and the decision to be entered in this case is not reviewable by any other court. Sec. 7463(b). // Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 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 IV. 3 Ms. Lindsay Dawn Hernandez appeared in this proceeding on her own behalf. Britton G. Wilson, Esquire, appeared on behalf of respondent. V. Respondent determined a deficiency of $8,000 in petitioner' s Federal income tax for taxable year 2009. The deficiency is attributable to a single adjustment to petitioner's return. Respondent disallowed the First-Time Homebuyer credit of $8,000 that petitioner claimed on her return. The sole issue for decision is whether petitioner is entitled to a First-Time Homebuyer's credit for $8,000, as claimed on her 2009 return. VI. Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found. Petitioner resided in Bartlesville, Oklahoma, at the time her petition was filed with the Court. On December 7, 2006, petitioner sold her principal residence located at 528 Highland Drive, Bartlesville, Oklahoma. On November 23, 2009, less than three years after selling that residence, petitioner purchased another residence located at 4001 Bonnie Lee Lane, Bartlesville, Oklahoma. Petitioner has occupied the property at 4001 Bonnie Lee Lane as Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 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 4 her primary residence since she purchased it. Petitioner's income tax return for 2009 claimed a First-Time Homebuyer Credit of $8,000 based upon the purchase of the residence located at 4001 Bonnie Lee Lane. We note that Form 5406, First-Time Homebuyer Credit and Repayment of the Credit, which was filed as part of petitioner's 2009 return, mistakenly lists the address of the home as "1651 Kings Drive #213, " rather than 4001 Bonnie Lee Lane . Respondent disallowed that credit . The explanation of that adjustment in the Form 886-A which was attached to the notice of deficiency states as follows: "We are unable to allow the First-Time Homebuyer' s credit, as our records indicate that you sold your previous home on December 7, 2006, and you purchased your new home on November 23, 2009. Since you owned a home in the three-year time period prior to the purchase of your new home, we cannot allow the credit . " Accordingly, respondent refunded only $3, 671 of the overpayment claimed on the return in the amount of $11,671. VII. As a general rule, the Commissioner' s determinations are presumed dorrect, and the taxpayer Heritage Reportidg Corporation (202) 628-4888 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 5 bears the burden of proving that those determinations are erroneous. Rule 142(a). Parenthetically, we note that section 7491(a) (1) shifts the burden of proof to the Commissioner in certain cases "if, in any court proceeding, a taxpayer introduces credible evidence with respect to any factual issue". In this case, we did not rely on the burden of proof in finding any factual issue relevant to ascertaining petitioner's tax liability. VIII. Generally, section 36(a) and (b) allow a credit of up to $8,000 to a first-time homebuyer of a principal residence in the United States. Section 36(c) defines a "first-time homebuyer" as "any individual if such individual (and if married, such individual's spouse) had no present ownership interest in a principal residence during the three-year period ending on the date of the purchase of the principal residence to which this section applies." For a similar provision, see section 72(t) (8) (D) (i) (I). IX. Petitioner asserts that the closing date of the sale of her residence at 528 Highland was originally scheduled to be November 15, 2006, but was delayed due to circumstances beyond her control. In Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 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 6 fact, petitioner claims that she had moved out of the property at 528 Highland before the original closing date. She argues that she qualifies under section 36(c) (1) as a first-time homebuyer because the three-year period should be calculated based on the original closing date of the sale of the property at 528 Highland, and not based on the actual closing date of her sale of the property. Petitioner cites no authority for her position. X. Section 36(c) (1) plainly states that in order to qualify as a first-time homebuyer, an individual and, if married, such individual's spouse, must have had no present ownership interest in a principal residence during the three-year period ending on the date of the purchase of the residence to which the credit applies. Unfortunately in petitioner's case, she had an' ownership interest in the residence at 528 Highland' during the three-year period ending on the date of the purchase of the residence at 4001 Bonnie Lee Lane. Accordingly, petitioner is disqualified as! a first-time homebuyer with respect to her purchase of the residence at 4001 Bonnie Lee Lane. As to this issue, we find that the statute Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 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 7 is clear and unambiguous and does not permit us to calculate the three-year period based upon the date petitioner moved out of the residence at 528 Highland, rather than the date on which petitioner sold the residence. We must apply the law as Congress enacted it, absent some constitutional defect, and we may not rewrite it. See Commissioner v. Lundy, 516 U.S. 235, 252 (1996). XI. To give effect to þur disposition of the disputed issues, decision will be entered for respondent. XII . THIS CONCLUDES THE ICOURT' S ORAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION IN THIS CASE . (Whereupon, at 3:29 p.m., the bench opinion in the above-entitled matter was concluded.) // // // // // // // // Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888