- 13 - Petitioner’s next argument is that “The totality of the circumstances in this matter points to the nature of the action as a tortlike action and the nature of the money as damages13 and not backpay.” We disagree. Gross income does not include the amount of any damages received on account of personal injuries or sickness. See sec. 104(a)(2).14 “The term ‘damages received (whether by suit or agreement)’ means an amount received * * * through prosecution of a legal suit or action based upon tort or tort type rights, or 12(...continued) Withheld income taxes are deemed paid on Apr. 15 of the year following the taxable year. See sec. 6513(b)(1); Baral v. United States, U.S. , 68 U.S.L.W. 4119 (Feb. 22, 2000). Thus, petitioner is deemed to have paid income tax for 1992 on Apr. 15, 1993, which is more than 2 years before Aug. 28, 1997. If petitioner did not constructively receive the income for backpay and interest on backpay in 1992, then she would have overpaid her 1992 taxes but would be time barred to claim credit for any overpayment. Furthermore, when petitioner actually or constructively receives the $62,275.62 plus interest from the interest-bearing account with Dauphin Deposit Bank and Trust Co., she will presumably have received taxable income, owe tax on that income, and might be unable to get any credit for the taxes previously paid. 13Petitioner seems to be arguing that the backpay was really a damage award and thus under sec. 104(a) is excluded from gross income. 14The Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104-188, sec. 1605(a), 110 Stat. 1838, amended sec. 104(a)(2) to limit the exclusion, inter alia, to “personal physical injuries or physical sickness.” The amendment does not apply to damages collected before the date of its enactment and has no bearing here.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011