- 8 -
The $15,480 petitioner paid to his former spouse during
the year in issue constitutes child support; no portion of that
payment is allocable to alimony. Sec. 71(c). It follows that
petitioner is not entitled to an alimony deduction for 2002,
and respondent’s disallowance of that deduction is sustained.
2. Negligence Penalty
According to respondent, the underpayment of tax required
to be shown on petitioner’s 2002 return is due to negligence or
intentional disregard of rules or regulations. See sec.
6662(a), (b)(1), and (c). Respondent bears the burden of
production with respect to the imposition of the penalty. Sec.
7491(c).
In this case the “underpayment of tax” equals the
deficiency, which except for derivative computational
adjustments, results from the disallowance of the alimony
deduction discussed above. Secs. 6211, 6664(a); sec. 1.6664-
2(a), Income Tax Regs. Respondent argues that petitioner, by
deducting as alimony a portion of child support payments made
during the year in issue, was “negligent” within the meaning of
section 6662(a).
Because the parties are well-versed in the controlling
principles, we see little point in burdening this summary
opinion with a detailed discussion of negligence, as that term
is used in the Internal Revenue Code. Suffice it to note that
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011