- 5 -
personal injuries or sickness incurred in the course of
employment.” Simply put, title II of the Social Security Act
(the Act) is not “in the nature of a workmen’s compensation act.”
The Act allows for disability payments to individuals regardless
of whether the individual was injured “in the course of
employment”. See 42 U.S.C. sec. 423(d)(1)(A) (2000); cf. Norris
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-152, affd. 46 Fed. Appx. 582
(9th Cir. 2002) (holding that a statute is not considered to be
in the nature of a workmen’s compensation act if it allows for
disability payments for any reason other than on-the-job
injuries). Accordingly, we sustain respondent’s determinations
relating to the Social Security benefits. Sec. 86(a).
Petitioners contend that they are entitled, pursuant to
sections 165 and 172, to deduct losses relating to the judgment.
Section 165 allows a deduction for any loss sustained during the
taxable year and not compensated for by insurance or otherwise.
Sec. 165(a). The deduction, however, is limited to those losses
incurred in a trade or business, in any transaction entered into
for profit, or as a result of a fire, storm, theft, or other
casualty. See sec. 165(c)(1), (2), and (3). Petitioners’
claimed loss was not incurred in a trade or business or in a
transaction entered into for profit (i.e., the injuries were
incurred while shopping for groceries). Accordingly, we sustain
respondent’s determinations that petitioners are not entitled to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011