Mark E. Picou - Page 3

                                        - 2 -                                         
               Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioner’s Federal             
          income taxes for the taxable years 2002 and 2003 of $2,441 and              
          $2,740, respectively.                                                       
               After petitioner’s concession,2 the issue for decision is              
          whether mortgage payments made by petitioner in 2002 and 2003 in            
          respect of the former marital residence in which petitioner’s               
          former wife retained no possessory or equitable interest are                
          deductible as alimony.  We hold that they are not.                          
                                     Background                                       
               Some of the facts have been stipulated, and they are so                
          found.  We incorporate by reference the parties’ stipulation of             
          facts and accompanying exhibits.                                            
               At the time that the petitions were filed, petitioner                  
          resided in Ste. Genevieve, Missouri.                                        
               Petitioner and his former wife, Terri Picou (Ms. Picou),               
          married in May 1989.  During their marriage, petitioner built the           
          marital home at 13221 Lakewood Drive (Lakewood home).  Petitioner           


               2  Petitioner concedes that the amounts deducted as alimony            
          were overstated.  For 2002, the amount deducted as alimony                  
          included home mortgage interest of $6,061, which he also deducted           
          on Schedule A, Itemized Deductions, of his 2002 return.                     
          Similarly for 2003, the amount deducted as alimony included home            
          mortgage interest of $3,896, which he also deducted on Schedule A           
          of his 2003 return.  The parties did not address whether the                
          amounts that petitioner claimed as alimony also included real               
          estate taxes that he deducted on Schedule A in the amount of $911           
          and $846 for 2002 and 2003, respectively.  See Zampini v.                   
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1991-395.  In any event, respondent did            
          not disallow any deductions claimed by petitioner on either                 
          Schedule A.                                                                 




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011