- 7 -
nevertheless continued to make payments of $400 per week in 2000.
If such payments were for alimony or maintenance, as petitioner
contends, his obligation to make such payments would have ended
either under New York law or under the terms of the oral
stipulation. His continuing to make payments after Ms.
McSkimming’s remarriage and her physical custody of the children
are factors that militate in favor of characterizing such
payments as for child support and not for alimony or separate
maintenance.4 We sustain respondent’s determination regarding
this issue.
Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case
Division.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
4 We realize that, of petitioner’s three children, Brian
was at least 21 years old during 2000 and that New York law
defines child support as “a sum to be paid * * * for care,
maintenance and education of any unemancipated child under the
age of twenty-one years.” N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law secs. 236, 240
(McKinney 2003) (emphasis added). However, under New York law,
petitioner would still have to make child support payments at the
full amount until he filed an application with a New York court
and received approval to modify such payment amount. In any
event, even if they were alimony payments, they would be
voluntary and as such would still not be deductible by
petitioner.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Last modified: May 25, 2011