- 6 -
The three properties referred to in the above-quoted paragraph
include the townhouse.1 Elsewhere in the divorce decree, the
divorce court declared that petitioner “should not have to pay”
any Federal income tax attributable to the sale of the townhouse.
Petitioner’s former spouse appealed the divorce decree. In
an opinion filed March 9, 2000, the Court of Appeals of Florida
affirmed the decree except as to one item of relief not relevant
here. See Zimmerman v. Zimmerman, 755 So. 2d 730 (Fla. Dist. Ct.
App. 2000).
Petitioner’s 1994 Federal income tax return was signed by
her and the return preparer on November 16, 1996. It was filed
on November 19, 1996. Taking into account an extension,
petitioner’s 1994 return was due to be filed on or before August
15, 1995. Although no direct evidence on the point has been
provided, the record suggests that petitioner computed her 1994
Federal income tax liability under the cash method of accounting
(formally known as the cash receipts and disbursement method of
accounting). The adjusted gross income reported on her 1994
return consists entirely of her wages as an employee of the Duval
County School Board. She did not report any income from the sale
of the townhouse or otherwise disclose the transaction on her
return.
1 It is unclear what properties, other than the townhouse,
the divorce court refers to in the above-quoted provision. The
reference to other properties might be an error.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011