In Uncategorized on 03/31/2018 at 01:05

With a deficiency thrown in.

I like the ingenious move. I prefer the successful one, naturally, but the unsuccessful, even if doomed from the start, may furnish grist for the blogger’s mill.

Here’s Bryan Douglas Wendt, et al, Docket No. 11366-17S, filed 3/30/18, an off-the-bench designated hitter from STJ Lewis (“Spelled Correctly”) Carluzzo.

Bryan and spouse have a descendant enrolled and in good standing at Texas Tech in the year at issue, and have paid therefor. The Red Raiders confirm said facts, and confirm that the younger Wendt hasn’t been busted for dope.

So Section 25A American Opportunity and Lifetime Learning credits are on the table.

But Bryan tries to stretch the solid single into a double, and gets thrown out.

Bryan also seeks the Section 222(a) deduction for the same amounts.

STJ Lew breaks the bad news. “…but section 222(c)(2) (A) expressly prohibits a deduction for tuition and fees if the taxpayer ‘elects to have section 25A apply with respect to such individual for such year.’” Transcript, at p. 6.

Bryan claims he didn’t elect.

“According to petitioners, the structure of section 25A, and the titles of the various credits allowable under that section, that is, the Hope Scholarship Credit, the Lifetime Learning Credit and the American Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC), including the overlap of the AOTC with the Hope Scholarship Credit, see sec. 25A(i), make the statute difficult to apply and subject the statute to differing interpretations.” Transcript, at p. 7.

STJ Lew isn’t buying. “Suffice it to note that we do not share their view in this regard.” Transcript, at p. 7.

If Bryan didn’t elect Section 25A, how does he get the credit at all? On the hearing Bryan cited to no other law. And Bryan has an even bigger problem if he didn’t elect the credit, but is left with the deduction.

“Ironically and arguably, petitioners’ position could result in the disallowance of the education credit, which in turn would allow the deduction for tuition and fees, but result in a substantially larger deficiency. To respondent’s credit, respondent does not alternatively argue for that result.” Transcript, at p. 8.

If you put it on your return, you elected. So two claims will only get you one.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

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

%d bloggers like this: