Quote Originally Posted by OldProfessor View Post
Update From the Oldprofessor

My main purpose in originating this post was to start a discussion about the 3 subsections of Sec. 152 (previously posted) that are not applied in determining a dependent for purposes of surviving spouse status.
I have a related question and would prefer to cite 2(a)(1)(B) more completely:
who maintains as his home a household which constitutes for the taxable year the principal place of abode (as a member of such household) of a dependent
(i) who (within the meaning of section 152, determined without regard to subsections (b)(1), (b)(2), and (d)(1)(B) thereof) is a son, stepson, daughter, or stepdaughter of the taxpayer, and
(ii) with respect to whom the taxpayer is entitled to a deduction for the taxable year under section 151.
For purposes of this paragraph, an individual shall be considered as maintaining a household only if over half of the cost of maintaining the household during the taxable year is furnished by such individual
First, while I cannot speak to intent, while I think your interpretation may likely be the only correct one, had I written the first part, I would have written it as you excerpted it, thusly:
who maintains as his home a household which constitutes for the taxable year the principal place of abode (as a member of such household) of a dependent (within the meaning of section 152, determined without regard to subsections (b)(1), (b)(2), and (d)(1)(B) thereof)
(i) who is a son, stepson, daughter, or stepdaughter of the taxpayer, and
(ii) with respect to whom the taxpayer is entitled to a deduction for the taxable year under section 151.
For purposes of this paragraph, an individual shall be considered as maintaining a household only if over half of the cost of maintaining the household during the taxable year is furnished by such individual
The way it currently stands could indicate that these relationships are somehow not constrained by the sections indicated. I am unsure how the relationships could be so constrained, so this would seem to be an invalid interpretation.

Hence, if I ignore this minor point, my concern lies with 2(a)(1)(B)(ii) above where it states "and with respect to whom the taxpayer is entitled to a deduction for the taxable year under section 151." I don't see how that fits with 2(a)(1)(B)(i). Am I missing something or doesn't a dependent qualifying for an exemption need to meet the "un-relaxed" rules?

There are two possibilities that I can surmise from this.
  1. §151 generally won't allow the deduction unless those subsections of §152 are met for a Qualifying Child or a Qualifying Relative. Hence, it would seem to contradict the "relaxed" rules of (i) which are not similarly relaxed for (ii) and thus, the child who does not need to meet the rules for (i) would need to meet them for (ii).
  2. It is saying that these rules are relaxed for both (i) and (ii) thus allowing an exemption for the son, daughter, stepson, or stepdaughter who met the "relaxed" rules of (i).

Please hold back on the attacks since I am not claiming that my interpretation is in any way correct. I am just trying to add to the discussion of what these may or may not mean.

I have been pondering this for some time.