Bombarger v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Dependency -- Sec. 152 (a) (9), I. R. C. 1954. -- Taxpayer and her minor son resided in home owned by another. Petitioner and homeowner, who were unrelated, shared expenses and household duties, with petitioner (the only wage earner) making most of the cash expenditures and the homeowner performing the majority of usual household duties. This living arrangement was for the mutual benefit of both.
Read the full summary
Dependency -- Sec. 152 (a) (9), I. R. C. 1954. -- Taxpayer and her minor son resided in home owned by another. Petitioner and homeowner, who were unrelated, shared expenses and household duties, with petitioner (the only wage earner) making most of the cash expenditures and the homeowner performing the majority of usual household duties. This living arrangement was for the mutual benefit of both. Held, the taxpayer could not properly claim the homeowner as a dependent as defined in section 152 (a) (9).
1Opinion of the Court
Tietjens, Judge:
The Commissioner determined a deficiency in income tax of $120 for the year 1954.
The only question for decision is whether petitioner properly claimed Winnie Stewart as a dependent.
FINDINGS OF FACT.
Petitioner is an individual residing in Marion, Ohio. Her income tax return for 1954 was filed with the district director of internal revenue at Columbus, Ohio.
During 1954 petitioner was employed as a salesclerk. She worked 5 days a week from 9 a. m. to 5:30 p. m. and 1 day a week for 2y2 hours. Pier gross earnings in 1954 were $2,365.48. Withholding taxes in the amount of $191.04…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Massey v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1931
3Cited by5 opinions
- Limpert v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1961
- Angstadt v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1968
- BENTLEY v. COMMISSIONERUnited States Tax Court · 1988
- Bombarger v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1958
- Limpert v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1961