Richard L. and Marjorie A. Freese - Page 9

                                          9                                           
          deduction under section 219.  We stated:  "While the result to              
          petitioner seems harsh, we cannot ignore the plain language of              
          the statute and, in effect, rewrite this statute to achieve what            
          would appear to be an equitable result."  Eanes v. Commissioner,            
          supra at 171 (citing Hildebrand v. Commissioner, supra at 59).              
          We apply this reasoning to the facts of the instant case.                   
               Based on the foregoing, we conclude that PERS is a qualified           
          plan established by the State of Ohio and that petitioner was an            
          "active participant" in PERS during 1990.  Accordingly, because             
          their modified AGI for 1990 exceeded $50,000, petitioners are not           
          entitled to a deduction of their IRA contributions.  Sec.                   
          219(g)(1) and (2).  Respondent is sustained on this issue.                  
                                                  Decision will be entered            
                                             for respondent.                          























Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  

Last modified: May 25, 2011