- 14 -
Byrne received his disability retirement benefits include CGC
sections 75060(a), 75061(a), 75075, and 75076(a).12
As part of the same argument, respondent suggests that CGC
sections 75075 and 75076(a) provide the same benefits for a
service retirement under CGC section 75025 as a disability
retirement under CGC section 75060(a) and that this is “fatal” to
petitioners’ case. We disagree. Respondent’s position is not
only inconsistent with established caselaw, it is also
inconsistent with his own ruling positions. See Stanley v.
United States, 140 F.3d 890 (10th Cir. 1998); Freeman v. United
States, 265 F.2d 66 (9th Cir. 1959); Givens v. Commissioner, 90
T.C. 1145, 1151 (1988); Dyer v. Commissioner, 71 T.C. 560, 562
(1979) (“whether a payment is in the nature of workmen’s
compensation depends upon whether the payment is made because of
injuries sustained in the line of duty, not upon the amount
paid”); Neill v. Commissioner, 17 T.C. 1015 (1951); Frye v.
United States, 72 F. Supp. 405 (D.D.C. 1947); Rev. Rul. 80-84,
1980-1 C.B. 35; Rev. Rul. 74-582, 1974-2 C.B. 34; Rev. Rul. 68-
10, 1968-1 C.B. 50. We cannot agree that the mere fact that a
statutory scheme allows the same benefits for a disability
12In Golden v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1971-162, we also
dealt with a disability retirement under the California Judges’
Retirement Law. In our findings of fact, we noted that the
taxpayer was retired under CGC sec. 75060, and we addressed the
issues therein in that context.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011