Johnson v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner and her former husband entered into a separation agreement providing for monthly payments to petitioner, but the agreement was not prompted by plans for an eventual divorce of the parties. Therefore, although the petitioner's husband, 2 years later, secured a divorce and remarried, the separation agreement was not incident to the divorce.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Akundell, Judge:
There is no dispute between the parties on the basic facts involved in this proceeding. The parties disagree only on the ultimate conclusion to be drawn from the facts. The only question we have to decide is whether the written agreement of separation, dated December 8, 1941, was “incident to” the divorce of petitioner and her husband within the meaning of section 22 (k) of the Internal Revenue Code. Briefly, this section provides that periodic payments received by a divorced wife, subsequent to the decree of divorce in discharge of a legal obligation, arising from the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Estate of Reid v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
- Izrastzoff v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. ToppingCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1952
- Campbell v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
3Cited by1 opinion
- Johnson v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1953