- 6 - Petitioner does not argue, nor would we agree, that military retirement pay is not a pension within the meaning of section 61(a)(11). See, e.g., Eatinger v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990- 310 (stating, without discussion: “A military retirement pension, like other pensions, is simply a right to receive a future income stream from the retiree’s employer.”); sec. 1.61- 11, Income Tax Regs. (“Pensions and retirement allowances paid either by the Government or by private persons constitute gross income unless excluded by law.”). Nor does petitioner argue, nor would we agree, that pension payments are not gross income to a divorced spouse who, upon the division of the property of the marital community attendant to the divorce, received the right to those payments as her separate property. See, e.g., Eatinger v. Commissioner, supra; Lowe v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1981-350. C. Petitioner’s Argument Petitioner relies on the following points: At the time of the divorce, the Court ordered that Petitioner’s ex-husband, Robert Mooney, make settlement payments to her in lieu of her community property interest in the military retirement benefits. Weir received cash settlement payments while her ex-husband, Robert Mooney, received the military retirement benefits as his separate property. At the time of the divorce, the equal division of the community was considered a nontaxable partition of the property. Whereas, this equal division of the community is considered a nontaxable partition of the property. Petitioner’s divorce became final on January 3, 1980. Petitioner’s view of the facts is that, on that date, anPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011