D. Lloyd and Betty Thomas - Page 4




                                        - 3 -                                         
               A. Disability Benefits                                                 
               Petitioner D. Lloyd Thomas (petitioner) was employed by the            
          Texas Department of Criminal Justice as an associate clinical               
          psychologist from August 1994 through February 1999.                        
               In or about February 1997, petitioner suffered a herniated             
          disk.  Petitioner’s injury was sufficiently severe as to require            
          bed rest and home confinement for a continuous period of time               
          that extended through July 1997.                                            
               During the first 2 months of his 6-month absence from work,            
          petitioner utilized his accumulated sick leave and annual leave.            
          After exhausting his leave, petitioner began receiving disability           
          benefits.  For the period from April 2 through July 30, 1997,               
          petitioner received disability benefits in the amount of $4,964.            
               Petitioner received disability benefits pursuant to a plan             
          of disability insurance that was sponsored by his employer.                 
          However, the premiums for such insurance were paid solely by                
          petitioner with after-tax dollars.  In this regard, petitioner              
          specifically elected, in August 1994, not to pay the premiums for           
          disability insurance with pre-tax dollars pursuant to “premium              
          conversion”.  This election remained in effect throughout 1997.             
               Petitioners did not report on their Federal income tax                 
          return the disability benefits received by petitioner in 1997.              
          In the notice of deficiency, respondent determined that such                
          benefits were includable in petitioners’ gross income for the               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011