Stephen Hayden - Page 12

                                       - 12 -                                         
          paid under the terms of the UNUM policy for the period of his               
          absence.  It is difficult to conceive how the monthly benefit could         
          be more closely tailored to an employee’s period of absence from            
          work.  Armstrong v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-579, supra.               
               Payments under the UNUM policy are designed to replace the             
          income an employee lost due to disability and are computed with             
          regard to the employee’s absence from work.  The UNUM policy                
          plainly did not compute the amount of payments "with reference to           
          the nature of the injury," nor did it award benefits "without               
          regard to the period the employee [was] absent from work."  We              
          conclude, therefore, that the benefits are not excluded from income         
          under section 105(c).                                                       
               We have considered various arguments made by petitioner not            
          discussed above and have not found them persuasive                          
               To reflect the foregoing and the parties’ concessions,                 

                                                  Decision will be entered            
                                             for respondent with respect to           
                                             the deficiencies and for                 
                                             petitioner with respect to the           
                                             additions to tax under section           
                                             6651(a).                                 










Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  

Last modified: May 25, 2011