- 13 -
In 1984, Congress replaced the periodic payment/installment
payment distinction contained in former section 71(a) and (c)
with the four-pronged definition of alimony set forth in section
71(b)(1) (including the proscription of postdeath liability
contained in subparagraph (D) thereof), reinforced by a recapture
rule (section 71(f)) for “front-loaded” alimony. Deficit
Reduction Act of 1984, supra, sec. 422(a). While the exception
(to the general rule of inclusion) for amounts “fixed” as child
support remained essentially unchanged, see sec. 71(c)(1),
Congress did overturn the result in Commissioner v. Lester,
supra, see sec. 71(c)(2) (reduction in support that is clearly
associated with a contingency, specified in the divorce or
separation instrument, that relates to a child will be treated as
an amount fixed as payable for child support). Lester continues,
however, to stand for the proposition that, subject to section
71(c)(2), amounts will not be treated as child support for
purposes of section 71 unless specifically designated as such in
the governing divorce document. See, e.g., Lawton v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-243; Raymond v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1997-219; Ambrose v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-128.
As enacted, section 71(b)(1)(D) closed with the following
parenthetical: “(and the divorce or separation instrument states
that there is no such liability)”. Congress dropped that
requirement in 1986, see Tax Reform Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99-514,
sec. 1843(b), 100 Stat. 2853, apparently “to mitigate the effects
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011