- 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