- 5 -
his ex-wife’s death, we agree with respondent that the payments
were not alimony.
As petitioner’s divorce decree is silent on whether his
monthly payments to his ex-wife would survive her death, our
analysis is guided by Florida State law. “Although Federal law
controls in determining petitioner’s income tax liability * * *,
State law is necessarily implicated in the inquiry inasmuch as
the nature of petitioner’s liability for the payment” was based
in Florida law. Berry v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-373,
affd. 36 Fed. Appx. 400 (10th Cir. 2002); see also, e.g., Sampson
v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 614, 618 (1983), affd. without published
opinion 829 F.2d 39 (6th Cir. 1987). In Commissioner v. Estate
of Bosch, 387 U.S. 456, 465 (1967), the Supreme Court addressed
the means for determining State law in the context of a Federal
tax case and stated that “the State’s highest court is the best
authority on its own law.”
Florida’s alimony statute specifically permits a trial court
to award alimony in the form of periodic payments, lump-sum
payments, or both. See Fla. Stat. Ann. sec. 61.08(1) (West
2006). “By definition, ‘lump-sum alimony’ is a fixed and certain
amount, the right to which is vested in the recipient and which
is not therefore subject to increase, reduction, or termination
in the event of any contingency, specifically including those of
death or remarriage.” Boyd v. Boyd, 478 So. 2d 356, 357 (Fla.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007