                       T.C. Memo. 2000-172



                     UNITED STATES TAX COURT



                  SEAN E. BATSON, Petitioner v.
          COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent


     Docket No. 11063-98.                      Filed May 25, 2000.


     James David Leckrone, for petitioner.

     Rebecca Dance Harris, for respondent.



                       MEMORANDUM OPINION


     COUVILLION, Special Trial Judge: Respondent determined a

deficiency of $2,100 in petitioner's Federal income tax for 1995.
                                - 2 -


     The sole issue for decision is whether petitioner is

entitled to dependency exemption deductions under section 151(c)1

for 1995.

     Some of the facts were stipulated, and those facts, with the

annexed exhibits, are so found and are incorporated herein by

reference.    Petitioner's legal residence at the time the petition

was filed was Old Hickory, Tennessee.

     During 1995, petitioner was employed by the U.S. Postal

Service.    Petitioner was married to Valencia Batson (Mrs.

Batson), and the couple had three children:    Dominique, Brittney,

and Monique.    Although petitioner and Mrs. Batson were married

throughout 1995, Mrs. Batson and the children moved out of the

family residence at some point in 1995 and went to live with Mrs.

Batson's mother.

     Petitioner and Mrs. Batson filed separate Federal income tax

returns for 1995.    Petitioner filed his Federal income tax return

as married filing separately.    On his 1995 return, petitioner

claimed dependency exemption deductions for Dominique, Brittney,

and Monique.    In the notice of deficiency, respondent disallowed

the dependency exemption deductions claimed by petitioner for the

three children.




     1
          Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are
to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year at issue.
                                   - 3 -


     Section 151(c) allows taxpayers to deduct an annual

exemption amount for each dependent as defined in section 152.

Under section 152(a), the term "dependent" means certain

individuals over half of whose support was received from the

taxpayer during the taxable year in which such individuals are

claimed as dependents.    Eligible individuals who may be claimed

as dependents include, among others, a son or daughter of the

taxpayer.    See sec. 152(a)(1).

     Section 1.152-1(a)(2)(i), Income Tax Regs., provides that,

in determining whether an individual received over half of his

support from the taxpayer, "there shall be taken into account the

amount of support received from the taxpayer as compared to the

entire amount of support which the individual received from all

sources, including support which the individual himself

supplied."    In Blanco v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 512, 514-515

(1971), this Court held that, in establishing that more than one-

half of a dependent's support has been provided, a prerequisite

to such a showing is the demonstration by competent evidence of

the total amount of the dependent's support from all sources for

that year.    If the amount of total support is not established and

cannot be reasonably inferred from competent evidence available

to the Court, it is not possible to conclude that the taxpayer

claiming the exemption provided more than one-half of the support

of the claimed dependent.
                                - 4 -


     Respondent agrees that petitioner would be entitled to all

of the claimed dependency exemptions but for the fact that

petitioner did not establish that he provided over one-half of

the support for any of the claimed dependents during 1995 as

required by section 152.    According to petitioner, Mrs. Batson

and the children lived in the family home during 1995 until they

moved out on November 30, 1995.    Petitioner claims that, although

Mrs. Batson earned money as a substitute teacher during the first

4 months of 1995, none of the amounts Mrs. Batson earned was used

to support the children.    Instead, petitioner claims he provided

all of the children's support for 1995 until they moved out in

November.    Further, petitioner claims the children did not

receive support from any other sources during the first 11 months

of 1995.    Importantly, petitioner was unable to describe with any

specificity the amounts he expended on the children's behalf

during 1995 and presented no documentary evidence to support his

vague testimony.

     Mrs. Batson and her mother, Patricia Campbell (Ms.

Campbell), testified at trial with respect to the Batsons' living

arrangements during 1995.    Both witnesses refuted petitioner's

testimony.    Mrs. Batson and Ms. Campbell claim that Mrs. Batson

and the children moved out of the family home in June 1995.    The

two testified that they provided the primary means of support to

the children while they lived in the family home and that
                                - 5 -


petitioner provided little support during this period.      Mrs.

Batson and Ms. Campbell further claim that Ms. Campbell provided

all of the children’s support once they moved into her home and

that petitioner provided no support to the children during that

period.

     Petitioner's evidence as to the support he provided and the

total support provided to the three children during 1995 is

wholly inadequate to establish his case.      Petitioner presented no

documentary evidence to support his claims, and his testimony

conflicts with that of two other witnesses.      Although the Court

is satisfied that petitioner did contribute toward the support of

his three children during 1995, the record does not establish the

total amount expended for the children from all sources for 1995.

It is evident to the Court that the children received a

substantial portion of their support from Mrs. Batson and Ms.

Campbell.    Moreover, the Court is unable to infer reasonably the

amount petitioner contributed because of the conflicting

evidence.    The Court, on this record, concludes that petitioner

did not establish that he provided over one-half of the

children's support during 1995.    See Blanco v. Commissioner,

supra.    Accordingly, respondent determination is sustained.



                                        Decision will be entered

                                        for respondent.
