Willoughby v. Comm'r

2009 T.C. Memo. 58, 97 T.C.M. 1302, 2009 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 58
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedMarch 18, 2009
DocketNo. 27969-07
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2009 T.C. Memo. 58 (Willoughby 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
Willoughby v. Comm'r, 2009 T.C. Memo. 58, 97 T.C.M. 1302, 2009 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 58 (tax 2009).

Opinion

LAWRENCE J. WILLOUGHBY, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Willoughby v. Comm'r
No. 27969-07
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 2009-58; 2009 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 58; 97 T.C.M. (CCH) 1302;
March 18, 2009., Filed
*58
Lawrence J. Willoughby, Pro se.
J. Anthony Hoefer, for respondent.
Chiechi, Carolyn P.

CAROLYN P. CHIECHI

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

CHIECHI, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency of $ 6,195 in petitioner's Federal income tax (tax) for his taxable year 2006.

The issues remaining for decision for petitioner's taxable year 2006 are:

(1) Is petitioner entitled to head of household filing status under section 2(b)? 1 We hold that he is not.

(2) Is petitioner entitled to the child care credit under section 21(a)? We hold that he is not.

(3) Is petitioner entitled to the additional child tax credit under section 24? We hold that he is not.

(4) Is petitioner entitled to the earned income tax credit under section 32(a)? We hold that he is not.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts in this case have been stipulated by the parties and are so found.

At the time petitioner filed the petition, he resided in Nebraska.

Throughout 2006, petitioner resided with a woman to whom he was not married and that woman's two daughters, JP and *59 KP, who were not his biological or adoptive daughters. During that year, petitioner provided more than one-half of the total support of each of those children. Neither JP nor KP suffered from any physical or mental impairment in 2006.

Petitioner timely filed Form 1040A, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, for his taxable year 2006 (2006 tax return). In the 2006 tax return, petitioner claimed (1) head of household filing status, (2) dependency exemption deductions for JP and KP, (3) the child care credit, (4) the additional child tax credit, and (5) the earned income tax credit. In that return, petitioner claimed the additional child tax credit because he reported in that return a total tax liability of zero.

Respondent issued to petitioner a notice of deficiency (notice) for his taxable year 2006. In that notice, respondent, inter alia, disallowed petitioner's claimed (1) head of household filing status, (2) dependency exemption deductions for JP and KP, (3) child care credit, (4) additional child tax credit, and (5) earned income tax credit.

OPINION

It is petitioner's position that, because respondent concedes that he is entitled for his taxable year 2006 to dependency exemption deductions *60 for JP and KP, he is entitled for that year to head of household filing status, the child care credit, the additional child tax credit, and the earned income tax credit that he claimed in his 2006 tax return.

Head of Household Filing Status

Section 1(b) provides a special tax rate for an individual who qualifies as a head of household. As pertinent here, section 2(b)(1) provides that an unmarried individual "shall be considered a head of a household" if that individual "maintains as his home a household which constitutes for more than one-half of such taxable year the principal place of abode" of "a qualifying child of the individual (as defined in section 152(c) * * *)", sec. 2(b)(1)(A)(i), or "any other person who is a dependent of the taxpayer, if the taxpayer is entitled to a deduction for the taxable year for such person under section 151", sec. 2(b)(1)(A)(ii). As pertinent here, however, section 2(b)(3)(B)(i) provides that "a taxpayer shall not be considered to be a head of a household * * * by reason of an individual who would not be a dependent for the taxable year but for * * * subparagraph (H) of section 152(d)(2)".

Respondent concedes that petitioner is entitled for his taxable *61 year 2006 to dependency exemption deductions for JP and KP. According to respondent, petitioner is entitled to those deductions only because JP and KP are his dependents under section 152(a)(2) by reason of their being his qualifying relatives under section 152(d)(2)(H). We must determine whether respondent is correct.

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

Related

Baker v. Comm'r
2014 T.C. Summary Opinion 57 (U.S. Tax Court, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2009 T.C. Memo. 58, 97 T.C.M. 1302, 2009 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 58, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willoughby-v-commr-tax-2009.