- 12 -
L. 591), 83d Cong., 2d Sess. 16 (1954).
Respondent contends that the section 107(2) requirement that
the rental allowance be used by the minister to rent or provide a
home (use limitation) and the rental value limitation at issue
here must both apply under section 107(2) to ensure that section
107 applies equally to all ministers. We disagree. We have not
previously construed section 107(1) and section 107(2) to require
identical treatment of ministers eligible under those two
subsections, nor does respondent’s position eliminate unequal
treatment. In Reed v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. at 214, we held that
the excess of the rental value of a home over the amount used to
provide it is not excludable under section 107(2). Thus, we
treated ministers who receive a housing allowance differently–-
and worse in some respects-–than ministers for whom housing is
provided under section 107(1). That is, a minister eligible for
the exclusion under section 107(1) may exclude the full rental
value of a home even if the rental value of the home exceeds the
amount used to provide it, but, under Reed, a minister eligible
for the exclusion under section 107(2) may not.
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