- 4 -
his former spouse and did not explain why the amount she was to
receive under the court order differed from the amount the Form
1099 shows the pension plan distributed to petitioner.
OPINION
Petitioner contends that (1) he did not receive the notice
of deficiency for 1987-89, (2) that his QRDO claim is an
appropriate spousal defense, and (3) that he is not taxable on
funds paid to his former wife from his pension plan because she
received those funds under a QDRO.
To establish that petitioner is not taxable on the funds
distributed by his pension plan, petitioner must show, inter
alia, the amount of funds distributed by the plan to his former
spouse under the divorce decree, and that the divorce decree is a
qualified domestic relations order that gave his former spouse
the right to receive all or part of petitioner’s benefits under
the plan. Sec. 414(p).
Petitioner did not offer sufficient evidence at his section
6330(b) hearing or before this Court to show that he is entitled
to prevail here under issue (3), his QDRO claim. Thus,
regardless of the outcome of issues (1) and (2), petitioner
cannot prevail. Therefore, we need not consider issues (1) and
(2).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011