DocketNumber: No. 12522-02S
Citation Numbers: 2003 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 93, 2003 T.C. Summary Opinion 92
Judges: \"Panuthos, Peter J.\"
Filed Date: 7/17/2003
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/17/2021
*93 PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b), THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.
PANUTHOS, Chief Special Trial Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of
Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner's Federal income tax for the taxable year 2000 in the amount of $ 3,157. The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner is entitled to an earned income credit, and (2) whether petitioner is entitled to a child tax credit.1
*94 Background
Some of the facts have been stipulated, and they are so found. Petitioner resided in Greenfield, California at the time the petition was filed with the Court.
During the tax year in issue petitioner lived in an apartment with Maria Magdalena Velasquez and her son, Manuel Velasquez, who was 6 years old in 2000. Petitioner is not the biological father of Manuel. Petitioner, Maria, and Manuel have lived together as a family since approximately 1997. Petitioner and Maria were not married during the tax year in issue. Petitioner provided some support for Maria and Manuel and treated Manuel as his child.
On his Federal income tax return for 2000, petitioner listed his filing status as head of household and claimed a deduction for a dependency exemption for Manuel, an earned income credit based on Manuel as a qualifying child, and a child tax credit. The return reflected Manuel Velasquez as petitioner's son.
Discussion
There has been no assertion, nor do we conclude, that petitioner has satisfied the requirements of section 7491(a), and, consequently, section 7491(a) does not shift the burden of proof.
(i) In general. -- An individual bears a relationship to
the taxpayer described in this subparagraph if such individual
is --
(I) a son or daughter of the taxpayer, or a descendant
of either,
(II) a stepson or stepdaughter of the taxpayer, or
(III) an eligible foster child of the taxpayer.
* * * * * * *
(iii) Eligible foster child. -- For purposes of clause
(i)(III), the term "eligible foster child" means an
individual not described in clause (i)(I) or (II) who --
*96 (I) is a brother, sister, stepbrother, or stepsister
of the taxpayer (or a descendant of any such relative) or
is placed with the taxpayer by an authorized placement
agency,
(II) the taxpayer cares for as the taxpayer's own
child, and
(III) has the same principal place of abode as the
taxpayer for the taxpayer's entire taxable year.
[7] It is clear that Manuel was neither a child, stepchild or descendant of petitioner. Thus, we look to whether Manuel would qualify as an eligible foster child. In this connection, petitioner cared for Manuel as his own child, and Manuel lived with petitioner for the entire year. However, there is nothing in this record indicating that the provision of
We next consider the child tax credit. A taxpayer may be entitled to a credit against tax with respect to each "qualifying child".
Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case Division.
Decision will be entered under Rule 155.
1. Respondent conceded that petitioner is entitled to a deduction for a dependency exemption for Manuel Velasquez and that petitioner is entitled to head of household filing status.↩