Schultheiss v. Comm'r

2005 T.C. Summary Opinion 169, 2005 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 150
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedNovember 15, 2005
DocketNo. 10376-04S
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2005 T.C. Summary Opinion 169 (Schultheiss v. Comm'r) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Schultheiss v. Comm'r, 2005 T.C. Summary Opinion 169, 2005 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 150 (tax 2005).

Opinion

MICHAEL T. AND KATHLEEN L. SCHULTHEISS, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Schultheiss v. Comm'r
No. 10376-04S
United States Tax Court
T.C. Summary Opinion 2005-169; 2005 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 150;
November 15, 2005, Filed

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

Michael T. and Kathleen L. Schultheiss, Pro sese.
Michael J. Proto and Debra Reale, for respondent.
Panuthos, Peter J.

PETER J. PANUTHOS

PANUTHOS, Chief Special Trial Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of section 7463 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect when the petition was filed. The decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion should not be cited as authority. Unless otherwise indicated, all subsequent section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

Respondent determined a deficiency of $ 4,230 in petitioners' Federal income tax for 2002. The issue is whether petitioners are entitled to claim dependency exemption deductions under section 151 for three children of petitioner, Michael T. Schulteiss (petitioner). At the time the petition was filed, petitioners resided in Warwick, Rhode Island.

Background

This case was submitted fully stipulated pursuant to*151 Rule 122. Petitioner was previously married to Mrs. Lisa Friemark. During their marriage, petitioner and Mrs. Friemark had three children: MAS, 1 KES, and SMS (children). Petitioner and Mrs. Friemark were divorced on December 29, 1997, pursuant to a Final Judgment of Divorce (divorce decree) entered by the Family Court for Washington County, State of Rhode Island.

In accordance with the divorce decree, petitioner and Mrs. Friemark were awarded joint legal custody of the minor children. Mrs. Friemark was given primary physical custody of the children (custodial parent). Petitioner and Mrs. Friemark agreed to the following provision for claiming the children as dependents for Federal income tax purposes:

That the parties shall share those tax deductions allowable as to the minor children, and Husband shall be permitted to claim all three children in the event that Wife would not benefit from use of a deduction, e.g., if she has not earned sufficient taxable*152 income.

Petitioners filed a Federal income tax return for tax year 2002, as married filing jointly. Petitioners claimed dependency exemption deductions for the children. Mrs. Friemark also claimed dependency exemption deductions for the children on a jointly filed Federal income tax return for tax year 2002.

Respondent disallowed petitioners' claimed dependency exemption deductions and issued a notice of deficiency to petitioners on March 29, 2004. Petitioners filed a timely petition on June 15, 2004.

Petitioner asserts that he is entitled to claim dependency exemption deductions for the children in any year in which Mrs. Friemark would not "benefit" from claiming the deductions. Respondent disagrees.

Discussion

A taxpayer may be entitled to claim as a deduction an exemption amount for each of his or her dependents. Sec. 151(c). An individual must meet the following five tests in order to qualify as a dependent of the taxpayer: (1) Support test; (2) relationship or household test; (3) citizenship or residency test; (4) gross income test; and (5) joint return test. Secs. 151 and 152. If the individual fails any of these tests, he or she does not qualify as a dependent.

As to*153 the support test, a taxpayer generally must provide more than half of a claimed dependent's support for the calendar year in which the taxable year of the taxpayer begins. Sec. 152(a). In the case of a child of divorced parents, if the child is in the custody of one or both of his parents for more than one-half of the calendar year and receives more than half his support during that year from his parents, such child shall be treated, for purposes of section 152, as receiving over half of his support during the calendar year from the parent having custody for a greater portion of the calendar year (the custodial parent). Sec. 152(e)(1). Custody is determined by the terms of the most recent decree of divorce or subsequent custody decree, and "will be deemed to be with the parent who, as between both parents, has the physical custody of the child for the greater portion of the calendar year." Sec. 1.152-4(b), Income Tax Regs.

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

Related

Lovejoy v. Commissioner
293 F.3d 1208 (Tenth Circuit, 2002)
Peterson Marital Trust v. Commissioner
102 T.C. No. 38 (U.S. Tax Court, 1994)
Miller v. Commissioner
114 T.C. No. 13 (U.S. Tax Court, 2000)
Truck & Equipment Corp. v. Commissioner
98 T.C. No. 12 (U.S. Tax Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2005 T.C. Summary Opinion 169, 2005 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schultheiss-v-commr-tax-2005.