Porter v. Comm'r

2015 T.C. Memo. 141, 110 T.C.M. 117, 2015 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 151
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Porter v. Comm'r. Read the opinion of the Court — 110 T.C.M. 1
United States Tax Court·Decided August 5, 2015·No. Docket No. 19448-13·Unpublished

Opinion

HIRAM LEROY PORTER, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Porter v. Comm'r
Docket No. 19448-13
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 2015-141; 2015 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 151; 110 T.C.M. (CCH) 117;
August 5, 2015, Filed

Decision will be entered for respondent.

*151 Hiram Leroy Porter, Pro se.
Andrew K. Glover, for respondent.
LAUBER, Judge.

LAUBER
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

LAUBER, Judge: The Internal Revenue Service (IRS or respondent) determined a deficiency of $2,904 for petitioner's 2010 taxable year.1 The central *142 question for decision is whether petitioner has sufficiently substantiated his claim, as a noncustodial parent, to a dependency exemption deduction for one of his three minor children. The answer to that question determines whether petitioner is entitled to head of household filing status and a child tax credit. We decide all issues in favor of respondent.

FINDINGS OF FACT

The parties filed a stipulation of facts with accompanying exhibits that are incorporated by this reference. Petitioner resided in Virginia when he petitioned this Court.

Petitioner has three children from a previous marriage. The marriage was dissolved in 2002 by a Florida court, which entered a divorce decree embodying the terms*152 of a mediation agreement that petitioner and his ex-wife had reached. The decree specified that petitioner's ex-wife was to have primary residential custody of all three children and was entitled to claim the oldest and youngest children as dependents for Federal income tax purposes, while petitioner was entitled to claim the middle child as a dependent. The decree was signed and *143 entered on November 27, 2002, by Judge Karen K. Cole. Neither petitioner nor his ex-wife signed the decree.2

Petitioner attempted to file electronically his Federal income tax return for 2 010. But unbeknownst to him, his ex-wife had claimed all three children (of whom she continued to have custody) as dependents on her 2010 return, which*153 caused the IRS to reject his electronic filing. Petitioner then submitted a paper return claiming his youngest child as a dependent; he also claimed head of household filing status and a child tax credit.3 Petitioner did not attach to his return Form 8332, Release/Revocation of Release of Claim to Exemption for Child by Custodial Parent, or any other document signed by his ex-wife and stating that she would not claim that child as a dependent.

Respondent commenced an examination of petitioner's 2010 return. During the audit petitioner submitted a copy of the divorce decree, leading the examiner to *144 note that petitioner had claimed a deduction for a dependent child different from the one the decree entitled him to claim. The examiner suggested that petitioner file an amended return; he did so, listing the middle child as a dependent. But this did not solve the problem because petitioner's ex-wife had claimed that child as a dependent also. The IRS accordingly issued petitioner a notice*154 of deficiency disallowing his claimed dependency exemption deduction and (as a corollary thereof) his claimed head of household filing status and child tax credit. Petitioner timely petitioned this Court challenging this deficiency.

OPINION

The Commissioner's determinations in a notice of deficiency are generally presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving those determinations erroneous. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115, 54 S. Ct. 8, 78 L. Ed. 212, 1933-2 C.B. 112 (1933). Deductions and credits are a matter of legislative grace; taxpayers bear the burden of proving their entitlement to deductions allowed by the Code and substantiating the amounts thereof. INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84, 112 S. Ct. 1039, 117 L. Ed. 2d 226 (1992); sec. 1.6001-1(a), Income Tax Regs.

Section 151 allows a deduction for "personal exemptions," including exemptions for dependents; for 2010, this amount was $3,650 per exemption. Rev. Proc. 2009-50, 2009-45 I.R.B. 617. When the parents of a dependent child are *145 divorced or legally separated,

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

Porter v. Comm'r, 2015 T.C. Memo. 141, 110 T.C.M. 117, 2015 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 151 (tax 2015).

2015 T.C. Memo. 141 (Porter v. Comm'r) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Welch v. Helvering
290 U.S. 111 (Supreme Court, 1933)
Indopco, Inc. v. Commissioner
503 U.S. 79 (Supreme Court, 1992)
Lovejoy v. Commissioner
293 F.3d 1208 (Tenth Circuit, 2002)
Hendricks v. Comm'r
2014 T.C. Memo. 192 (U.S. Tax Court, 2014)
Brissett v. Comm'r
2003 T.C. Memo. 310 (U.S. Tax Court, 2003)
Chamberlain v. Comm'r
2007 T.C. Memo. 178 (U.S. Tax Court, 2007)
Swint v. Commissioner
142 T.C. No. 6 (U.S. Tax Court, 2014)
Miller v. Commissioner
114 T.C. No. 13 (U.S. Tax Court, 2000)
Michaels v. Commissioner
87 T.C. No. 81 (U.S. Tax Court, 1986)