- 5 - Memo. 2000-281. In this case, petitioner’s SSDI benefits were reduced, dollar for dollar, by the worker’s compensation benefits that she received. Her situation is clearly contemplated by section 86(d)(3), and the worker’s compensation benefits that she received during the year in issue are subject to Federal income tax as provided in that statute. Petitioners do not suggest that respondent’s application of section 86 is mathematically erroneous, and we are satisfied that it is not. Petitioners explain that petitioner would not have applied for SSDI benefits unless required to do so by her long- term disability plan. They question the fairness of the situation, pointing out that, had she not applied for SSDI benefits, her worker’s compensation benefits would not be subject to Federal income tax. According to petitioners, forgoing petitioner’s SSDI benefits might have been to their financial advantage. We appreciate petitioners’ consternation; nevertheless, it is the application of controlling law to the undisputed facts that informs our decision–-not whether the result is fair or, as petitioners suggest, unfair. Section 86(d)(3) requires that a portion of the SSDI benefits (including the amount offset by worker’s compensation benefits) received by petitioner duringPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011