- 9 -
possibility of recovery. Therefore, we conclude that there is a
reasonable likelihood that petitioner will recover the property
in question. Petitioner has also failed to offer any specific
evidence regarding the cost basis or fair market value of the
property involved. For both reasons, petitioner is precluded
from claiming a casualty or theft loss with respect to 1991. We,
therefore, sustain respondent's determination on this issue.
4. Applicability of 10-Percent Penalty to Pension and IRA
Distributions
During 1991, petitioner terminated his employment with
Strahman, citing concerns for his health. Upon his termination
in 1991, petitioner received a distribution in the amount of
$27,080.21 from a pension plan. Petitioner also received a
distribution in the amount of $16,194.32 from an IRA. Petitioner
reported these amounts as income on his return but did not report
the 10-percent additional tax as provided by section 72(t).
Section 72(t) generally provides for a 10-percent additional
tax on a distribution from a qualified plan, unless the
distribution comes within one of the statutory exceptions. Sec.
72(t)(1) and (2). At issue here is the exception provided in
section 72(t)(2)(A)(iii), pertaining to distributions
attributable to an employee's being disabled within the meaning
of section 72(m)(7).7 Petitioner contends that the 10-percent
7 For the purposes of sec. 72(t), the term "employee" also
refers to participants in individual retirement accounts. Sec.
72(t)(5)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011