- 10 -
the value of their church-provided housing, and we do not believe
the phrase “part of his compensation” in section 107(1) and
section 107(2) has that effect. Instead, we give full meaning to
the words of the statute when we read section 107(1) and section
107(2) to require simply that the source of the funds be the
minister’s compensation.4
Where a statute plainly authorizes an exclusion from income,
as here, we require “unequivocal evidence of legislative purpose
before construing the statute so as to override the plain meaning
of the words used therein.” Zinniel v. Commissioner, 89 T.C.
4 In Rev. Rul. 71-280, 1971-2 C.B. 92, a minister bought a
home, making a downpayment and mortgage payments in excess of the
amount of his annual compensation as a minister. The
Commissioner ruled that the taxpayer’s exclusion under sec.
107(2) is limited to the fair rental value of a house, including
furnishings, appurtenances thereto such as a garage, and
utilities. Despite this, we apparently have never so held, nor
have we held that the “part of his compensation” language in sec.
107(2) bars exclusion of all of a minister’s compensation. In
Deason v. Commissioner, 41 T.C. 465 (1964), the taxpayer received
$1,300 compensation as a minister both in 1959 and 1960, and used
more than those amounts to provide his own home. The
Commissioner apparently did not challenge the taxpayer’s
exclusion of 100 percent of his pay. Cf. Marine v. Commissioner,
47 T.C. 609 (1967), where a taxpayer who received $13,000
compensation as a minister, sold a house and used the proceeds to
buy another house. As a result of his use of the proceeds of the
sale of the first house to buy the second house, we found that he
“used” only $3,142.22 of his $13,000 compensation for housing.
In dicta, we noted that if the taxpayer were to prevail in Marine
v. Commissioner, supra, “his entire compensation * * * would
escape taxation, a result that seems clearly contrary to the
statute.” Id. at 613. We found that the taxpayer’s entire
salary was artificially designated as a rental allowance, and
limited him to an exclusion of the actual amount ($3,142.22) used
by him to rent or provide a home.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011