- 8 -
school, or a similar contingency) or (2) at a time that can
clearly be associated with that kind of contingency, an amount
equal to the amount of such reduction is to be treated for
purposes of section 71(c)(1) as an amount fixed as payable for
the support of children of the payor spouse.
On the record before us, we find that the 1991 temporary
order payments are alimony or separate maintenance payments
within the meaning of section 71(b)(1), and not child support
payments within the meaning of section 71(c). We therefore
reject Ms. Raymond's position and sustain Mr. Raymond's position
with respect to those payments.
Ms. Raymond concedes that the 1991 temporary order payments
meet the definition of alimony in section 71(b)(1). Specifi-
cally, Ms. Raymond concedes (1) that those payments were received
by Ms. Raymond under the temporary order that incorporated the
support stipulation, sec. 71(b)(1)(A) and (2)(C); (2) that the
temporary order does not designate the 1991 temporary order
payments as payments that are not includible in the gross income
of Ms. Raymond under section 71(a) and that are not allowable as
deductions under section 215(a), sec. 71(b)(1)(B); (3) that Mr.
Raymond and Ms. Raymond were not members of the same household at
the time the 1991 temporary order payments were made, sec.
71(b)(1)(C); and (4) that Mr. Raymond had no liability to make
the 1991 temporary order payments, or to make any payments (in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011