- 7 -
this circumstance would not occur. Note that I.R.C.
Section 71(b)(1) provides nowhere therein that the
payment actually be “required.”
We understand petitioner to be contending that, even though the
divorce court designated petitioner’s Thrift Savings Plan as
marital property and awarded petitioner’s former spouse a 50-
percent interest in the Thrift Savings Plan, petitioner is the
only person who can pay off a loan against the plan pursuant to
the Thrift Savings Plan rules,3 and therefore, because petitioner
is paying off his former spouse’s 50-percent interest in the loan
against the Thrift Savings Plan, that payment is deductible
alimony.
Respondent contends that the interest in the Thrift Savings
Plan allotted to petitioner’s former spouse is merely a property
settlement, not deductible alimony. We agree with respondent.
The divorce decree stated that the Thrift Savings Plan was
marital property and granted petitioner’s former spouse a 50-
percent interest. By repaying the loan, petitioner does not make
alimony payments. Petitioner’s former spouse received her share
of the Thrift Savings Plan through an outright transfer. What
remains in the plan is petitioner’s and is burdened with the
whole of the outstanding loans. As petitioner pays down these
loans the net value of his share increases and inures to his
3Contrary to petitioner’s assertions, we found no specific
order in the divorce decree directing petitioner to pay off the
loan against the Thrift Savings Plan.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011