- 5 - We must next decide whether this income is community property income.2 Under Washington law, with certain exceptions, all property (including compensation earned by a spouse) acquired after marriage is presumed community property and treated as acquired or earned by each spouse. See Wash. Rev. Code Ann. secs. 26.16.010 through 26.16.030 (West 1997); Zielasko v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-177. Community property income is attributable 50 percent to each spouse. See Poe v. Seaborn, 282 U.S. 101 (1930). Petitioners presented no evidence demonstrating that Mr. Morin's compensation, the prizes, or the retirement distribution are not community property. Therefore, we conclude that under Washington law this income is community property and must be allocated 50 percent to each petitioner. See also Rule 142(a). Respondent also determined that the retirement distribution is subject to an additional tax pursuant to section 72(t). 2 Respondent, in the separate notices of deficiency sent to Mr. Morin and Mrs. Morin, determined: (1) Mr. Morin is taxable on 100 percent of (a) the compensation he received from Les Morin Subaru, (b) the retirement distribution he received from Common Sense Shareholder Services, and (c) the prizes he received from Subaru of America, Inc.; (2) Mrs. Morin is taxable on 100 percent of the gain from her sale of real property; (3) Mr. Morin is taxable on 50 percent of the gain received by Mrs. Morin; and (4) Mrs. Morin is taxable on 50 percent of the net income earned by Mr. Morin. Respondent took these inconsistent positions to protect respondent's rights under Washington law because petitioners were uncooperative married nonfilers.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011