Catherine H. Poole, f.k.a. Catherine H. Dames - Page 8

                                         -8-                                          
               On his 1989-93 income tax returns, Dr. Ibach deducted as               
          alimony the payments he made to petitioner pursuant to Paragraph 7          
          of the divorce decree.                                                      
          Notices of Deficiency                                                       
               Respondent sent a notice of deficiency to petitioner and her           
          former husband Mr. Dames for their 1989-91 tax years, determining           
          that petitioner improperly excluded from income $72,600 of alimony          
          payments for each taxable year.  Accordingly, respondent increased          
          petitioner's taxable income for each year by $50,000.  In the               
          second notice of deficiency sent to petitioner for her 1992 and             
          1993 tax years, respondent determined that she improperly excluded          
          from income $72,600 and $32,553 of alimony income for 1992 and              
          1993, respectively.  Accordingly, respondent increased petitioner's         
          taxable income by $50,000 and $32,553, respectively, for 1992 and           
          1993.  (These determinations were based upon respondent's view that         
          Dr. Ibach's payments to petitioner were taxable to her as alimony           
          up to 10 percent of the principal sum in each year.)                        
                                       OPINION                                        
               The issue for decision is whether payments Dr. Ibach made to           
          petitioner pursuant to Paragraph 7 of the divorce decree during the         
          years in issue were alimony or a property settlement.  Petitioner           
          contends that the payments were nontaxable, lump-sum installment            
          payments of a property settlement, not in the nature of support.            
          Respondent disagrees.                                                       






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011