- 20 -
Ms. Braden did not contribute any part of the downpayment,
nor did she supply the money to pay the monthly mortgage
payments. After petitioners separated, Ms. Braden continued to
live in the family home and was supposed to pay the mortgage and
other household expenses. She did not do so. Arrearages owed to
the mortgage, telephone, and gas and electric companies were paid
out of proceeds from the sale of petitioners’ home, and, to the
extent that the sale proceeds were insufficient, petitioner paid
the balance.
With part of the distributions, Ms. Braden purchased some
furniture and furnishings for the family home and paid for some
home improvements. In the divorce settlement, Ms. Braden kept
all of petitioners’ household furniture and furnishings, with the
exception of a computer and desk, television, VCR, vacuum
cleaner, and couch and matching chair. Both Ms. Braden and
petitioner contributed to the purchase of two cars in 1995; Ms.
Braden contributed cash, and petitioner contributed by trading in
a 1995 pickup truck that he had purchased with his own funds.
Taking into account all the facts and circumstances, we are
satisfied that petitioner did not benefit substantially from the
understatement. Neither petitioner’s use of the family home and
its furniture and furnishings, nor his receipt of a few items of
furniture and equipment as part of his divorce settlement
amounted to a substantial benefit, particularly when his overall
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011