31
The parties have agreed and stipulated:
If Mr. Adair was not, during the taxable years at
issue, "an employee of the United States" within the
meaning of I.R.C. section 911(b)(1)(B)(ii), the
compensation he received for his work for NATO during
those years was "foreign earned income", as that term
is defined in I.R.C. section 911(b)(1)(A).
We treat this stipulation by the parties as a concession by
respondent that since we have found that petitioner was not an
employee of the United States, his compensation, both pay and
allowances, as a member of NATO, are entitled to exemption from
United States income tax under section 911(a)(1), cf. Walker v.
Commissioner, 101 T.C. 537, 550 (1993), subject, of course, to
the other applicable restrictions of section 911, including the
dollar limitations on foreign earned income in section 911(b)(2)
for the years in question. Although petitioners claimed an
exclusion from income for the year 1988 on account of housing,
presumably under section 911(a)(2), and although respondent's
statutory notice of deficiency disallowed this claimed exclusion
as well as the claimed exclusion for salary under section
911(a)(1), petitioners did not allege error on respondent's part
because of the disallowance of this housing exclusion, and
alleged no facts or argument, either in their petition or on
brief, in support of the proposition that such housing exclusion
for 1988 should be allowed. We conclude that petitioners have
abandoned the issue.
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011