Moody v. Comm'r
Opinion
Decision will be entered for respondent.
GOEKE,
(1) whether petitioner is entitled to dependency exemption deductions for his two children, notwithstanding the fact that he did not attach Forms 8332, Release of Claim to Exemption for Child of Divorced or Separated Parents, signed by the "custodial parent" of the children for his 2008 taxable year; and
(2) whether petitioner is entitled to child tax credits for the taxable year at issue.
We hold for respondent on both issues.
This case was submitted to the Court fully stipulated pursuant to
Petitioner married Tammy Jean Moody in 1991. Thereafter, they had two children, A.T.M. and A.B.M., 2 in 1992 and 1993, respectively. On January 26, *270 1997, by a judgment decree of dissolution of marriage (divorce decree), petitioner and Ms. Moody divorced. The divorce decree was not signed by petitioner or Ms. Moody and provided in part: [Petitioner] shall be entitled to claim the children as tax exemptions on * * * [petitioner's] state and federal income tax returns for the present year and for all subsequent years so long as * * * [petitioner] is current in child support payments at the end of that year. If * * * [petitioner] is current in child support for the year claimed, * * * [Ms. Moody] shall execute IRS Form 8332 by January 10th of the following year to effectuate this agreement.
Petitioner filed a Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, for his 2008 taxable year. He checked "single" filing status on the return and claimed exemptions *271 for himself and for both of his children. Petitioner also attached two Forms 8332 to the return, both unsigned by Ms. Moody, purporting to represent Ms. Moody's release of her claim of exemption for the two children. 3 Petitioner was current in child support payments for the 2008 taxable year.
Generally, the Commissioner's determinations are presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving that those determinations are erroneous. *271
A taxpayer may deduct an additional exemption "for each individual who is a dependent (as defined in
(A) the custodial *273 parent signs a written declaration (in such manner and form as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe) that such custodial parent will not claim such child as a dependent for any taxable year beginning in such calendar year, and (B) the noncustodial parent attaches such written declaration to the noncustodial parent's return for the taxable year beginning during such calendar year.
In particular, this Court has emphasized the critical importance of the custodial parent's signature on this declaration.
The Forms 8332 attached to petitioner's 2008 tax return were not signed by Ms. Moody. Clearly, therefore, petitioner *275 did not satisfy the conditions articulated in
A taxpayer is entitled to a child tax credit for "each qualifying child".
We are sympathetic to petitioner's plight; however, we are bound by the statute as written and the accompanying regulations when consistent therewith.
Footnotes
1. Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the years in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
2. It is the policy of the Court to refer to a minor by his or her initials.
See Rule 27(a)(3)↩ .3. Petitioner stipulated that Ms. Moody was the custodial parent of A.T.M. and A.B.M. in 2008.↩
4. Respondent does not contest whether other conditions for appropriately claiming a child as a dependent, prescribed in
sec. 152(c)(1) ,(2) , and(3)↩ , have been satisfied.5. For purposes of
sec. 152 , the "custodial parent" is the parent having custody of the child for the greater portion of the calendar year.Sec. 152(e)(4)(A) . The "noncustodial parent" is, conversely, the parent without custody of the child for the greater portion of the calendar year.Sec. 152(e)(4)(B) . As notedsupra↩ , petitioner stipulated that he was the "noncustodial parent" of both A.T.M. and A.B.M. for his 2008 taxable year.6. As the divorce decree plainly does not satisfy the requirements of
sec. 152(e)(2)(A) , we need not address the document's conditional provisions.See ("[T]he Internal Revenue Service cannot be expected to police divorce decrees and separation agreements or determine taxpayer compliance therewith.").Gessic v. Commissioner , T.C. Memo. 2010-88, 2010 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 93, at *8↩
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.