Barrett v. Comm'r
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
WELLS,
At the time of filing the petition, petitioner resided in North Carolina.
Petitioner timely filed his 2004 Federal income tax return and claimed dependency exemption deductions and the child tax credit with respect to his minor children: R.K.B., J.O.B., and J.D.B. (hereinafter collectively the children). 2
Petitioner did not live with any of the children at any time during 2004. At all times during 2004 the children lived with their mother, Jill R. Kingdon (hereinafter Ms. Kingdon), *282 who had sole legal custody.
Petitioner and Ms. Kingdon provided all of the children's support in 2004.
Petitioner and Ms. Kingdon did not live together at any time in 2004.
The record does not contain a written declaration, signed by Ms. Kingdon, stating that she will not claim the children, or any one of them, as dependents for the 2004 taxable year; no such declaration was attached to petitioner's 2004 tax return.
Petitioner and Ms. Kingdon provided all of the support for the children in 2004. At all times in 2004 Ms. Kindgon had sole legal custody of the children and they lived with her, so she was the custodial parent. Ms. Kingdon never executed a written declaration releasing her right to claim the children as dependents for taxable year 2004. Accordingly, Ms. Kingdon is deemed to have provided over half of the children's support for the year. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to dependency exemption deductions for the children for taxable year 2004.
Subject to limitations based on adjusted gross income, a taxpayer is entitled to a child tax credit with regard to each qualifying child of the taxpayer.
We have considered all of the contentions and arguments of the parties that are not discussed herein, and we find them to be without merit, irrelevant, or moot. 4
To reflect the foregoing,
Footnotes
1. Unless otherwise indicated, all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, and all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended↩
2. The Court refers to minor children by their initials. See
Rule 27(a)(3)↩ .3. This is true whether or not the parents have ever been married to one another.
.King v. Comm'r , 121 T.C. 245, 251↩ (2003)4. Petitioner's main argument seems to be that an error in his tax preparation software resulted in his underpayment of tax for 2004. Obviously, that is not relevant to the question of whether petitioner owes the deficiency respondent determined for taxable year 2004.↩
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.