Attorney-at-Law

ACCEUILLONS, LET’S WELCOME, JUDGE ALBERT G. LAUBER

In Uncategorized on 02/05/2013 at 16:42

Taking my cue from the greeting in the old Montreal Forum, here’s the Tax Court’s latest bright light, Judge Albert G. Lauber, summa cum laude from Yale, with a M.A. from Clare College Cambridge, etc. etc., appointed to Tax Court January 31, 2013, the newest star in the Tax Court line-up.  Most impressive resume, and should be a fine addition to the Tax Court Bench.

Hopefully, he will not be wasting his sweetness on the desert air, as Tommy Gray lamented in 1751, writing the ten-thousandth “you didn’t attach a Form 8332, so no child credit” case, such as poor Judge Kerrigan had to deal with today, in Paul Edward Vokovan, 2013 T. C. Memo. 37, filed 2/5/13.

I’ll spare you most of the details, dear reader, the story is one often told. Paul Edward claims he attached a signed original Form 8332 to a return from twelve years ago, produces an unsigned copy on the trial, but has neither return nor copy of the signed Form 8332, and IRS can’t find it either. So he’s fighting about a $1500 deficiency.

No dice, Paul Edward; you must have a signed original Form 8332, or an original signed equivalent so near to the Form 8332 in substance that you might as well just use the Form 8332, attached to each and every return for each and every year until each and every would-be qualifying child reaches adulthood, or death relieves you of this burden.

Judge Kerrigan: “Petitioner stipulated that he did not attach a signed Form 8332 to his 2008 Federal income tax return. If petitioner did not attach a signed Form 8332 or a statement conforming to the substance of Form 8332, he did not satisfy section 152(e)(2) and the prior existence of a Form 8332 is immaterial; petitioner needed to attach a copy of a signed Form 8332, or a statement conforming to the substance of Form 8332, every year to his tax return or he is not entitled to the exemption deduction. See Chamberlain v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-178, slip op. at 7.” 2013 T. C. Memo. 37, at pp. 7-8.

So Judge Lauber, a man of distinguished academic and professional stature, a scholar and a seasoned practitioner, must now apply his formidable intelligence and magisterial experience to such as this.

Welcome to Tax Court, Judge Lauber.

  1. Would not an amended return do? Within 2 years of collection?

    Did this really go to Tax Court and not be referred back to Appeals?

    Somehow. I and associates have always found the IRS to be reasonable. Have we just been lucky, or totally naive?

    Like

    • Mr Leibowitz, the problem here seems to be that the ex also claimed the deduction for those years, and won’t give petitioner a Form 8223. The requirement of a signed original Form 8223 for every tax year, while it makes life easy for IRS, is a practical impossibility where there is any animosity between the parties (and even when the parties don’t hate each other, why should they have to continue to deal with each other any more than is absolutely necessary, or involve lawyers).

      I have no problem with IRS enforcing the law. My problem is with a bad law. My proposal- Custodial spouse gets deduction even if non-custodial spouse pays, but non-custodial spouse gets offset of child support payments to account for tax benefit s/he is losing.

      Lewis C. Taishoff, Esq., EA

      350 Broadway, Suite 701 New York, NY 10013-3966 Telephone (917) 459-7875 e-mail: ltaishoff@netscape.net Visit my Blog: http://www.taishofflaw.com Follow me on Twitter: @taishofflaw Connect with me on LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/lewis-taishoff/5/725/875

      Like

      • I like your proposal but with one stipulation, which you may already include but doesn’t show, the amount of the offset should be the same as the exemption amount. And now the problem does arise of a double benefit for each child for divorced parents as opposed to still married parents.

        Taxes, never a simple answer/solution.

        And I did not know that the spouse had declared the dependent. And the permanent release is not a great solution either since the payer may stop paying, even under threat of jail time.

        See previous paragraph. 🙂 Just adding a bit of levity.

        Like

  2. Sorry for the typos, Form number is 8332.

    Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.