- 6 -
rulings that would provide for what would amount to an umbrella
hardship exception, applicable on a case-by-case basis, to the
10-percent additional tax on early distributions from qualified
retirement plans. See, e.g., Vulic v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
2004-51 (premature distribution used to refinance the taxpayer’s
home, to pay for son’s wedding, and to make payments on credit
cards subject to section 72(t) additional tax); Robertson v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-100 (premature distribution used
for the taxpayer’s “own subsistence and that of her family”
subject to section 72(t) additional tax), affd. 15 Fed. Appx. 467
(9th Cir. 2001).
Under section 72(t), petitioners are liable for the 10-
percent additional tax on the $55,555 early distribution that
petitioner received from the plan.2
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
2 Petitioners do not argue that the burden of proof on the
issue in this case should be shifted to respondent under sec.
7491. In any event, we do not decide the issue in this case on
the burden of proof. Also, regardless of whether the $5,555
additional tax under sec. 72(t) would be considered an
“additional amount” under sec. 7491(c) and regardless of whether
the burden of production with respect to this additional tax
would be on respondent, respondent in this case has met any such
burden of production by showing that petitioner received the
distribution when he was 53 years of age. See H. Conf. Rept.
105-599, at 241 (1998), 1998-3 C.B. 747, 995.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6
Last modified: May 25, 2011