- 13 -
the imposition of additional tax under section 72(t) applies to
her. Therefore, we also sustain respondent’s determination as to
Mrs. Keeley’s pension distribution.
We note that although petitioners do not expressly rely on
section 72(t)(2)(E)15 for the distributions they received in
1998, they testified that one purpose for the distributions was
to pay for their daughter’s college loans. However, petitioners
did not present any evidence for this Court to determine whether
this exception applies in the present case.
In closing, we think it appropriate to observe that we found
petitioners to be very conscientious taxpayers who obviously take
their Federal tax responsibilities quite seriously. We are also
sympathetic to the hardship that Mr. Keeley’s mental health
problems have brought to petitioners’ lives, and we acknowledge
that petitioners used the IRA and pension distributions for
laudable purposes. Nevertheless, we are constrained to hold for
respondent based on the applicable law.
Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case
Division.
To give effect to our disposition of the disputed issue, as
15 The exception from the additional tax for qualified
higher education expenses applies only “to distributions after
Dec. 31, 1997, with respect to expenses paid after such date (in
taxable years ending after such date), for education furnished in
academic periods beginning after such date”. Taxpayer Relief Act
of 1997, Pub. L. 105-34, 111 Stat. 809.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011