Opinion ID: 1704367
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: whether the trial court abused its discretion in awarding both federal income tax dependent exemptions to mother?

Text: The trial court ruled that Mother, the custodial parent, could claim the federal income tax exemptions for the children. Father claims this was an abuse of discretion and he should have been awarded at least one of the exemptions. This issue is controlled by settled precedent in South Dakota. Earley v. Earley, 484 N.W.2d 125, 128 (S.D.1992) cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 113 S.Ct. 272, 121 L.Ed.2d 200 (1992); Brandriet v. Larsen, 442 N.W.2d 455 (S.D.1989); Sarver v. Dathe, 439 N.W.2d 548, 551-52 (S.D.1989); State ex rel. Dryden v. Dryden, 409 N.W.2d 648, 652 n. 2 (S.D.1987). Trial courts do not have the authority to award dependency exemptions for federal income taxes. [3] Federal tax law mandates that, absent three exceptions not applicable here, the exemption goes to the custodial parent. 26 U.S.C. § 152(e)(1) (1993). Where the trial court had no authority to allocate tax exemptions to the non-custodial parent, it did not abuse its discretion when it ruled both exemptions belonged to the custodial parent. [4]