- 6 -
Talbot, Inc., & Subs. v. Commissioner, 104 T.C. 574, 582 (1995),
affd. 162 F.3d 1236 (9th Cir. 1999).
Although section 86 refers to a “taxpayer”, a joint return
is treated as the return of a taxable unit, and the net income
reported on the return is subject to tax as though the return
were that of a single individual. Boehm v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1999-227 (citing Helvering v. Janney, 311 U.S. 189, 192
(1940)). In applying the formula in section 86 to cases
involving a joint return, we have not distinguished between
income earned by the recipient of Social Security benefits and
income earned by the recipient’s spouse. See, e.g., Reimels v.
Commissioner, supra at 247-248; Green v. Commissioner, supra;
Penn v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-267; Thomas v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-120.
Petitioners’ interpretation of section 86 would lead to
incongruous results. For example, as discussed above, the amount
of taxable Social Security benefits is calculated by reference to
an adjusted base amount. The higher the adjusted base amount,
the lower the amount of taxable Social Security benefits. In
general, the adjusted base amount is $34,000. In the case of a
joint return, however, the adjusted base amount is increased to
$44,000.
If we were to adopt petitioners’ theory, a married taxpayer
filing jointly would receive the benefit of a higher adjusted
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011