- 2 - After concessions by petitioner2, the sole issue for decision3 is whether petitioner may exclude $3,705 from gross income as a parsonage allowance pursuant to section 107(2). Background Some of the facts have been stipulated, and they are so found. The stipulation of facts and attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. At the time he filed his petition, petitioner resided in Beverly Hills, California. Beginning in November 1950, petitioner worked for Temple Adath Israel (the temple) in Marion, Pennsylvania. He stayed with the temple for about 30 years until he retired in 1980. Petitioner graduated from La Salle College with a degree in social studies. Petitioner, however, never attended a religious seminary4, and he neither is nor was an ordained rabbi or a 2 Petitioner concedes a $1,270 interest income adjustment and a $226 Social Security income adjustment for the 1992 tax year. 3 Petitioner also contests the constitutionality of sec. 107, claiming it is in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This contention is unavailing, in that if we decide the constitutional argument in petitioner's favor, the result would lead to the disallowance of the parsonage exclusion that he seeks. We refuse to consider this issue, as the outcome could not affect petitioner's tax liability in this case. See Kirk v. Commissioner, 51 T.C. 66, 72 (1968), affd. 425 F.2d 492 (D.C. Cir. 1970). 4 Petitioner testified that he intended to join the Jewish Theological Seminary of America in New York sometime around the year 1950, but was unable to find housing in the New York area. Unable to join the seminary, he began working for the temple.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011