- 19 -
In addition, we reject petitioner’s apparent contention that
the real property acquisition policies set forth in 42 U.S.C.
sec. 4651 can or should have a bearing upon our decision.
Petitioner alleges that the condemnation proceedings were
initiated in violation of these policies, stating on brief that
the States’s action
to condemn Petitioner’s house and therewith pay her
“market value” of the house as just compensation under
state law, rather than negotiate compensation equal to
the cost of a “comparable replacement dwelling” as was
her federal entitlement, was ultra vires and the state
condemnation action was thereby void ab inito [sic].
She then goes on to assert that tax-exempt replacement housing
compensation should not be transformed into taxable compensation
by reason of such an ultra vires action. In response, we observe
that the Relocation Act, 42 U.S.C. sec. 4602(a), declares
specifically that “The provisions of section 4651 of this title
create no rights or liabilities and shall not affect the validity
of any property acquisitions by purchase or condemnation.”
We therefore hold that the $65,000 received by petitioner is
not a relocation assistance payment exempted from taxation by the
Relocation Act but is just compensation taxable to the extent the
amount paid exceeded her basis in the condemned property.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Last modified: May 25, 2011