The petitioner and his wife married in late 2008 and purchased the marital home in late 2009. Before the purchase, the wife had owned a principal residence and resided in it for more than five consecutive years as required by I.R.C. Sec. 36(b)(1)(D) to qualify as long-term homeowner. The petitioner had not owned a home during the prior three-year period and, therefore, qualified as a first-time homeowner. On the couple's joint tax return for 2009, the couple claimed a $6,500 long-term homeowner tax credit. The IRS denied the credit in full on the basis that the spouses did not both qualify for long-term homeowner credit. The IRS conceded that the petitioner would have qualified for the first-time homeowner credit in his own right and that the wife would have qualified for the long-term homeowner credit in her own right, but read the statute to require both spouses to satisfy either the long-term homeowner requirement or first-time homeowner requirement on joint return. The Tax Court reasoned that such a statutory construction was "absurd," and held that both spouses qualified for one of the homeowner credits and that the credit was limited to the long-term homeowner credit of $6,500. On appeal, the appellate court reversed on the basis that the statute was clear that the term "individual" included both spouses in a marriage and that each homeowner credit was independent of the other. Thus, both spouses had to qualify for the same credit. While the petitioner would have been able to claim the first-time homebuyer credit ($8,000) had he merely lived with his girlfriend in the purchased home without marrying her, the three-judge panel stated that it's holding was not "so gross as to shock the general moral...sense." Packard v. Comr., 139 T.C. No. 15 (2012), rev'd. and rem'd., No. 13-10586, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 5584 (11th Cir. Mar. 27, 2014).