- 2 - Rules 180, 181, and 183.1 The Court agrees with and adopts the opinion of the Special Trial Judge that is set forth below. OPINION OF THE SPECIAL TRIAL JUDGE POWELL, Special Trial Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioners' 1993 Federal income tax in the amount of $9,935 and an accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(a) in the amount of $1,987. Petitioners resided in Decatur, Georgia, at the time they filed their petition. The sole issue is whether Richard A. Adams (petitioner) is entitled to exclude a payment received from his former employer, IBM, from gross income pursuant to section 104(a)(2). The facts may be summarized as follows. Petitioner was employed by IBM in 1956. As part of IBM's publicized downsizing petitioner was retired on September 30, 1993. The next day petitioner was employed by a joint venture between IBM and Eastman Kodak (Kodak) that became Technology Service Solutions (TSS). TSS apparently had been a service section of IBM that was eliminated from the corporate structure by forming the partnership with Kodak. Thus, for example, most, if not all, of petitioner's co-employees and supervisors came from IBM. In addition, it appears that petitioner kept several IBM corporate credit cards while at TSS. 1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011