Davis v. Comm'r

2007 T.C. Summary Opinion 140, 2007 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 143
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Davis v. Comm'r. Read the opinion of the Court — 89 T.C.M. 1518
United States Tax Court·Decided August 13, 2007·No. No. 4876-06S·Unpublished

Opinion

BURNICE JEROME DAVIS, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Davis v. Comm'r
No. 4876-06S
United States Tax Court
T.C. Summary Opinion 2007-140; 2007 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 143;
August 13, 2007., Filed

PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b), THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.

*143
Burnice Jerome Davis, Pro se.
Marshall R. Jones, for respondent.
Vasquez, Juan F.

JUAN F. VASQUEZ

VASQUEZ, 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 case.

Respondent determined a $ 1,390 deficiency in petitioner's 2003 Federal income tax. After a concession, 2 the issues remaining for decision concerning 2003 are: (1) Whether petitioner is entitled to claim a dependency exemption for JJD 3 pursuant to section 151(c); (2) whether petitioner is entitled to claim a child tax credit for JJD pursuant to section 24(a); and (3) whether petitioner is entitled to head of household filing status pursuant to section 2(b).

Background

Some of the facts have been stipulated *144 and are so found. The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. At the time he filed the petition, petitioner resided in Daleville, Alabama.

On April 13, 1996, petitioner married Kimberly Jean Davis (Ms. Davis). Petitioner and Ms. Davis had one child together, JJD. On April 30, 2001, petitioner and Ms. Davis divorced. Pursuant to their divorce, Ms. Davis received physical custody of JJD, petitioner received visitation rights, and petitioner was required to pay child support in the amount of $ 434 per month. JJD did not live with petitioner during 2003. The final judgment in the divorce proceeding ordered petitioner to pay 72 percent of all reasonable and necessary medical, dental, eye care, hospital, and other health care expenses incurred in the care and treatment of JJD.

Petitioner filed his Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return for 2003 as a head of household and claimed a dependency exemption and a child tax credit for JJD. Ms. Davis did not sign a written declaration providing that she would not claim JJD as a dependent in 2003.

In the notice of deficiency, respondent determined that petitioner was not entitled to a dependency *145 exemption for JJD on his 2003 tax return. Additionally, respondent determined that petitioner was not entitled to a child tax credit for JJD in 2003. Finally, respondent determined that petitioner is not entitled to file as head of household.

DiscussionI. Dependency

Generally, a taxpayer is allowed a dependency deduction for a son or daughter if that child meets the statutory definition of dependent. Sec. 151(c)(1), (3). The term "dependent" is defined as an individual who receives over half of his support from a taxpayer. Sec. 152(a).

Section 152(e) provides the support test for a child of divorced parents. Under that provision, if:

(A) a child (as defined in section 151(c)(3)) receives over half of his support during the calendar year from his parents --

(i) who are divorced or legally separated under a decree of divorce or separate maintenance,

(ii) who are separated under a written separation agreement, or

(iii) who live apart at all times during the last 6 months of the calendar year, and

(B) such child is in the custody of one or both of his parents for more than one-half of the calendar year,

such child shall be treated, for purposes of subsection (a), as receiving over half of his support *146 during the calendar year from the parent having custody for a greater portion of the calendar year (hereinafter in this subsection referred to as the "custodial parent"). [Sec. 152(e)(1).]

Section 152(e)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Davis v. Comm'r, 2007 T.C. Summary Opinion 140, 2007 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 143 (tax 2007).

2007 T.C. Summary Opinion 140 (Davis v. Comm'r) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lovejoy v. Commissioner
293 F.3d 1208 (Tenth Circuit, 2002)
Miller v. Commissioner
114 T.C. No. 13 (U.S. Tax Court, 2000)