Court Opinion

ID: 9792537
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:30:31.022944+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:43.497482
License: Public Domain

JOHNSON, Justice,
concurring and dissenting.
I concur with the majority opinion, except the portion holding that our divorce courts may allocate the income tax dependency exemption to the noncustodial parent by directing the custodial parent to execute a written waiver of the exemption under I.R.C. § 152(e)(2). In my view, this holding emasculates the intent of Congress in enacting the scheme for determining which parent is entitled to claim the exemption.
The written waiver provided for in I.R.C. § 152(e)(2) is one of only three exceptions to the general rule established in I.R.C. § 152(e)(1), providing that the custodial parent will be entitled to the dependency exemption under the circumstances specified there. The other exceptions relate to multiple-support agreements (I.R.C. § 152(e)(3)) and “qualified pre-1985 instruments” (I.R.C. § 152(e)(4)). If Congress had intended that divorce courts could allocate the exemption, it would have been easy to have included this as a fourth exception. One wonders how many other portions of the Internal Revenue Code may now be rewritten by the decisions of trial courts ordering taxpayers to execute various returns, waivers, elections, or other documents.
In my view, our divorce courts are very capable of dealing with the subject of child support after determining whether the custodial parent intends to claim the dependency exemption, without the need to rewrite the Internal Revenue Code to allow courts to require the waiver of the exemption.