- 9 - executives, petitioners stressed the importance of the CBD department but did not indicate that their business reputations had been injured or that they intended to assert a tort type claim against IBM. Petitioners have attempted to show that their business reputations were injured by IBM’s actions. However, there is no evidence, other than petitioners’ own testimony, which is not persuasive, that IBM made the MSTP payments to settle petitioners’ personal injury claims. We also note that the release form appears to be a standard document used by IBM for all of its employees who participate in the MSTP program. Moreover, the fact that the payments were based on time of service and rate of pay is more indicative of severance pay rather than a payment for personal injury. See Sodoma v. Commissioner, supra. Severance pay is taxable income. In sum, we find that the payments received by petitioners are not excludable from income. To reflect the foregoing, Decisions will be entered for respondent.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Last modified: May 25, 2011