T.C. Summary Opinion 2009-167
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
ADAM SANCHEZ, Petitioner v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Docket No. 11162-08S. Filed November 12, 2009.
Adam Sanchez, pro se.
Brook R. Barrow, for respondent.
WHERRY, Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the
provisions of section 7463 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect
when the petition was filed.1 Pursuant to section 7463(b), the
decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and
this opinion shall not be treated as precedent for any other
1
Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended and in effect for
the tax year at issue. All Rule references are to the Tax Court
Rules of Practice and Procedure.
- 2 -
case. Petitioner petitioned the Court to redetermine a
deficiency for his 2006 tax year. The issues for decision are
whether petitioner is entitled to a dependency exemption
deduction and a child tax credit for 2006.
Background
The parties submitted this case to the Court fully
stipulated pursuant to Rule 122. The stipulated facts and
accompanying exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference.
Petitioner resided in Texas when he filed his petition.
Petitioner and his former spouse are co-conservators of
their two minor children, ALS and AJS. An Order In Suit To
Modify Parent-Child Relationship, issued by the 37th Judicial
District Court, Bexar County, Texas, and dated September 13,
2006, provides in pertinent part that petitioner “shall have the
right in accordance with section 152(e)(2) of the Internal
Revenue Code, to claim the dependency exemption for * * * [ALS]
for the purpose of federal income taxes for 2006 and other
subsequent calendar years.” Petitioner claimed a $3,300
dependency exemption deduction and a $1,000 child tax credit for
ALS on his 2006 Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return.
Petitioner’s former spouse, on her 2006 Form 1040A, U.S.
Individual Income Tax Return, also claimed a dependency exemption
deduction for ALS for the 2006 tax year.
- 3 -
On February 11, 2008, respondent issued petitioner a notice
of deficiency with respect to petitioner’s 2006 tax year,
disallowing his claimed dependency exemption deduction and child
tax credit. As a result, respondent determined a $1,825 Federal
income tax deficiency. Petitioner, on May 12, 2008, timely
petitioned this Court.
Discussion
I. Burden of Proof
Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and the
taxpayer must maintain adequate records to substantiate the
amounts of any deductions or credits claimed. Sec. 6001;
INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992);
sec. 1.6001-1(a), Income Tax Regs. As a general rule, the
Commissioner’s determination of a taxpayer’s liability in the
notice of deficiency is presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears
the burden of proving that the determination is improper. See
Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).
Although section 7491(a) may shift the burden of proof to the
Commissioner in specified circumstances, petitioner has not
established that he meets the requirements under section
7491(a)(1) and (2) for such a shift.
II. Dependency Exemption Deductions
Section 151(a) and (c) allows a taxpayer to claim an
exemption deduction for each of the taxpayer’s dependents as
- 4 -
defined in section 152. Section 152(a)(1) and (c) defines
“dependent”, in pertinent part, as a “qualifying child”, which
includes a son or daughter of the taxpayer who has not provided
over one-half of his or her own support. “[S]upport” is defined
as including “food, shelter, clothing, medical and dental care,
education, and the like.” Sec. 1.152-1(a)(2)(i), Income Tax
Regs.
In the case of a child of divorced parents, if the child
receives over half of its support from its parents who are
divorced under a decree of divorce, and the child is in the
custody of one or both of its parents for more than one-half of
the taxable year, then the child will be treated as the
qualifying child of the parent having custody for the greater
portion of the calendar year (the custodial parent).
Sec. 152(e)(1).
The noncustodial parent is nevertheless entitled to claim
the dependency exemption deduction for a given tax year if, and
only if, one of three exceptions in section 152(e) applies. One
of the exceptions is if “the custodial parent signs a written
declaration” that the custodial parent will not claim the child
as a dependent for that tax year. Sec. 152(e)(2)(A). The
noncustodial parent must also attach the written declaration to
his or her Federal income tax return for that tax year. Sec.
152(e)(2)(B); see Presley v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-553.
- 5 -
The written declaration required under section 152(e)(2)
must be made either on a completed Form 8332, Release of Claim to
Exemption for Child of Divorced or Separated Parents, or on a
statement conforming to the substance of Form 8332. Miller v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 184, 189 (2000); see sec. 1.152-4T(a),
Q&A-3, Temporary Income Tax Regs., 49 Fed. Reg. 34459 (Aug. 31,
1984).
We conclude that petitioner is not entitled to a dependency
exemption deduction for ALS for his 2006 tax year. First,
petitioner has not proved that he was the custodial parent of ALS
in 2006. He did not provide any evidence, or even argue, that he
was the custodial parent. Moreover, the Order In Suit To Modify
Parent-Child Relationship indicates that for at least part of
2006 ALS resided with her mother in Arizona rather than with her
father in Texas. Second, petitioner did not satisfy the
exception provided in section 152(e)(2) because he did not attach
a Form 8332 or other equivalent written declaration to his 2006
Form 1040 in accordance with that provision.2 Therefore,
2
We acknowledge that the Sept. 13, 2006, Order In Suit To
Modify Parent-Child Relationship granted petitioner the right to
claim a dependency exemption deduction for ALS for 2006.
However, a State court cannot determine issues of Federal law.
See Miller v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 184, 196 (2000). To
properly claim the dependency exemption deduction, petitioner
needed to satisfy the requirements of sec. 152, which he could
have done by attaching a signed Form 8332 to his 2006 Form 1040.
If his former spouse refused to sign and provide the required
Form 8332 in time for him to file his 2006 Federal income tax
(continued...)
- 6 -
petitioner is not entitled to claim a dependency exemption
deduction for ALS for 2006 because ALS was not his qualifying
child as that term is defined in section 152(c).
III. Child Tax Credit
Section 24(a) authorizes a child tax credit with respect to
each “qualifying child” of the taxpayer. A “qualifying child”
means an individual who meets the requirements of section 152(c)
and who has not attained the age of 17. Sec. 24(c)(1). Because
we have concluded that ALS is not petitioner’s qualifying child
as defined by section 152(c) for 2006, she does not fit within
the meaning of “qualifying child” as defined by section 24(c).
Accordingly, petitioner is not entitled to a child tax credit for
ALS for 2006.
The Court has considered all of petitioner’s contentions,
arguments, requests, and statements. To the extent not discussed
herein, the Court concludes that they are meritless, moot, or
irrelevant.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be
entered for respondent.
2
(...continued)
return, petitioner’s recourse was to the State courts to have
them enforce the Texas State court order. This Court does not
have the jurisdictional power to do so.