- 8 -
eligibility for Civil Service disability benefits, the nature or
cause of the disability is irrelevant; the only consideration is
the employee’s ability to perform his or her job. We concluded:
Because disability payments under the Civil
Service Retirement Act are not paid for personal
injuries or sickness incurred in military service, we
conclude that section 104(a)(4) did not entitle
petitioner to exclude the disability payments he
received in the years in issue. [Id. at 867.]
In the 20-plus years since this Court decided Haar, we have
consistently followed it in numerous cases addressing whether
benefit payments under Civil Service and public employee
disability plans were eligible for exclusion under section
104(a)(4). See, e.g., Jeanmarie v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
2003-337 (holding that Civil Service Retirement System disability
benefits were not excludable); Kiourtsis v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1996-534 (holding that disability retirement income
received from New York City Employees’ Retirement System was not
excludable); French v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1991-417 (holding
that Civil Service annuity payments from U.S. Postal Service were
not excludable); Grady v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1989-55
(holding that disability pension received from Civil Service
Retirement and Disability Fund was not excludable); Tolotti v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1987-13 (holding that Civil Service
disability retirement payments from U.S. Office of Personnel
Management were not excludable); Lonestar v. Commissioner, T.C.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011