- 6 -
In the instant case, James is not seeking to have the
Judgment entered nunc pro tunc. The Judgment specifically states
that it is:
ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, that * * *
[Virginia] be and hereby is granted Judgment dissolving
the marriage relation heretofore existing between the
plaintiff, VIRGINIA * * * and the defendant, JAMES * * *.
The oral stipulation of December 11, 1984, was merged into the
Judgment, which was signed by the Chautauqua County Supreme Court
justice on April 1, 1985, and entered on April 3, 1985. The
payments in question were made pursuant to that Judgment, as
modified on December 17, 1985. Thus, the pertinent divorce
instrument in this case was executed after December 31, 1984.
Consequently, sections 71 and 215, as amended by the Tax Reform
Act of 1984, govern the payments in issue.
Section 215(a) allows an individual, in computing adjusted
gross income, to deduct amounts paid during the year if such
amounts are includable in the gross income of the recipient under
section 71(a). Section 71(c)(1) specifically excludes from the
recipient's gross income any "part of any payment which the terms
of the * * * instrument fix (in terms of an amount of money or a
part of the payment) as a sum which is payable for the support of
children of the payor spouse." Thus, a sum fixed by the
instrument or agreement as payable for child support is not
deductible by the payor as alimony. Sec. 71(c)(1); sec. 1.71-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011