- 64 - (except to the extent they relate to payments of premiums on the Ms. Quinn policy as discussed supra note 3). Accord Neonatology Associates, P.A. v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 43 (2000). Consequently, we hold that those amounts are not deductible under section 162(a) by either the PCs or VRD/RTD.22 B. Inclusion in Income Respondent determined that the amounts of the life insurance premiums that were paid by each doctor’s PC on his behalf are includable in the doctor’s gross income under section 61(a) as “accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have complete dominion.” See Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426, 431 (1955). We disagree that those amounts are includable in the doctors’ gross income. While the payments of the premiums were indeed accessions to the doctors’ wealth, our decision on this issue does not rest simply on that finding. Instead, our decision turns on our finding that the doctors’ PCs were S corporations and that the payment of the premiums by the PCs was essentially a distribution to the doctors of corporate profits rather than a payment that the PCs made to the doctors with a compensatory intent. See Neonatology 22 Although the PCs may arguably be entitled to deduct the costs of the current life insurance protection purchased through the STEP plan, see Neonatology Associates, P.A. v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 43 (2000), petitioners have not requested any such deductions, and the record does not allow the Court to find the amounts of any such deductions.Page: Previous 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 NextLast modified: March 27, 2008