2005 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 10">*10 PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b), THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.
COHEN, Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of
Respondent determined a deficiency of $ 1,720 in petitioner's Federal income tax for 2002. The issue for decision is whether petitioner's higher education expenses incurred in 2003 and 2004 can be applied to reduce the amount of a distribution in 2002 subject to the 10-percent additional tax of
Background
Some of the facts have been stipulated, and the stipulated facts are incorporated in our findings by this reference. Petitioner resided in Spokane, Washington, at the time that she filed her petition.
Petitioner withdrew $ 2005 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 10">*11 17,200 from her individual retirement plan with Putnam Investments (Putnam) in 2002. Petitioner planned to use the money for college expenses. However, petitioner did not enroll in college until 2003.
Petitioner timely filed Form 1040A, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, for 2002. Petitioner reported the $ 17,200 distribution from Putnam; however, she did not report the 10-percent additional tax under
Discussion
Under
The 10-percent additional tax, however, does not apply to certain distributions.
The parties stipulated that petitioner's distribution was from an IRA. Additionally, respondent concedes that petitioner incurred qualified higher education expenses in 2003 and 2004. Petitioner contends that the higher education expenses incurred in 2003 and 2004 should be used to reduce the amount of the distribution subject to the 10-percent additional tax in 2002.
Under the express language of the statute, the qualified higher education expenses must be incurred by the taxpayer in the taxable year of the distribution.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered for respondent.