- 4 - differentiation between the two groups; i.e., whether the classification bears a reasonable relationship to a legitimate governmental purpose. See Dandridge v. Williams, 397 U.S. 471 (1970).3 The legitimate governmental purpose for a 65-year-old to pay tax on disability payments, while those under the age of 65 do not, is “to grant a tax benefit to persons receiving disability pay when they would normally have been at work.” Ruggere v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 979, 987 (1982). After the retirement age, “there is no meaningful distinction between continued disability payments and normal pension payments”. Id. at 985. The classification is reasonably related to the Government’s purpose and is constitutionally valid. Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case Division. To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered for respondent. 3 Notably, legislatures have especially broad latitude in creating classifications and distinctions in tax statutes. Regan v. Taxation With Representation, 461 U.S. 540, 547 (1983).Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Last modified: May 25, 2011