Thomas J. Rabideau and Sandra M. Rabideau - Page 6

                                         - 6 -                                        
          between the total cost of coverage selected by petitioner and the           
          amount of the Met Life contribution, i.e., $5,733 less $4,811 or            
          $922, was deducted from petitioner's wages on a pre-tax basis.              
               In August 1989, petitioner was injured and filed a claim for           
          disability benefits.  For 1992, the taxable year in issue,                  
          petitioner received disability benefits from Met Life in the                
          amount of $35,520.60.  The amount of such benefits was based on             
          the applicable percentage of petitioner's salary and his years of           
          service prior to the date of his disability.                                
               Met Life issued petitioner a Form W-2 (Wage and Tax                    
          Statement) for 1992.  On such form, Met Life characterized the              
          disability benefits that were paid to petitioner as compensation.           
               On their 1992 Federal income tax return, petitioners did not           
          report as income the disability benefits that petitioner received           
          from Met Life.  In the notice of deficiency, respondent                     
          determined that such benefits constituted taxable income.                   
          Respondent also determined that petitioners were liable for an              
          accuracy-related penalty for negligence under section 6662(a).5             
                                       OPINION                                        
               As a general rule, section 104(a)(3) excludes from an                  
          employee's gross income amounts received through accident or                
          health insurance for personal injuries or sickness.  However, the           
          section provides an exception for amounts received by an employee           

               5 As previously stated, respondent subsequently conceded the           
          accuracy-related penalty.                                                   




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011