- 10 -
Petitioner has failed to prove that the short-term
disability benefits paid to him in 1994 were attributable, in
whole or in part, to any contributions he made under the City's
short-term disability plan. All of the short-term disability
benefits petitioner received were paid directly by the City.
Under section 105(a), benefits paid by the employer must be
included in the employee's income. See also sec. 104(a)(3); sec.
1.105-1(a) and (b), Income Tax Regs.
Similarly, petitioner has failed to prove that the long-term
disability benefits paid to him in 1994 were attributable, in
whole or in part, to any contributions he made under the City's
long-term disability plan. Indeed, the record reflects that all
of the premiums with respect to the plan from at least January
1991 through the date when petitioner separated from service due
to disability were made by the City. Daniel Matusiewicz, the
acting deputy director of administrative services for the City,
testified at trial regarding the City's method of accounting for
its premium contributions to the long-term disability plan and
referred to payroll records which were admitted into evidence
without objection. The payroll records show that, for each pay
period ending in January 1991 through the date of petitioner's
disability in January 1994, the City made all premium payments to
the third-party insurer providing the long-term disability
coverage for petitioner, and that no portion of those premiums
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011