Budd v. Commissioner

7 T.C. 413, 1946 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 117
United States Tax Court·Decided July 30, 1946·No. Docket No. 8829·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

OPINION.

Kern, Judge-.

The narrow issue presented by this proceeding is whether the $2,400 disallowed as a deduction by respondent is a “periodic payment which the terms of the decree or written instrument fix, in terms of an amount of money or a portion of the payment, as a sum which is payable for the support of minor children” of petitioner within the meaning of section 22 (k) of the Internal Revenue Code, which, together with Regulations 111, section 29.22 (k)-l (d), are set out in the margin.3

If paragraph (3) of the separation agreement, which we have set out in our findings, stood by itself, we would have no hesitancy in deciding that there was no periodic payment fixed thereby, “in terms of an amount of money or a portion of the payment, as a sum which is payable for the support” of a minor child of petitioner, and therefore we would conclude that the full amount of the payment made to petitioner’s wife in the taxable years (the sum of $6,000) would be deductible from petitioner’s gross income pursuant to the provisions of section 23 (u) of the Internal Revenue Code.4

However, section (3) of the separation agreement is only one of many paragraphs contained therein. Any adequate consideration of the problem here presented requires a construction of the agreement as a whole, and the reading of each paragraph in the light of all the other paragraphs thereof. When the separation agreement which is here before us for consideration is so read, it seems to us apparent that, of the $6,000 paid by petitioner to a former wife during the taxable years pursuant to that agreement, the sum of $2,400 represented an amount fixed by the terms of the agreement, in the terms of an amount of $200 per month, as a sum payable for the support of petitioner’s minor child, and we have so found.

On the issue presented we decide in favor of the respondent.

Decision will be entered under Rule 50.

In computing net income there shall be allowed as deductions ; * * *
• *•**•*
(u) Alimony, Etc., Payments. — In the case of a husband described in section 22 (k), amounts includible under section 22 (k) in the gross income of his wife, payment of which is made within the husband’s taxable year. * * *

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Budd v. Commissioner, 7 T.C. 413, 1946 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 117 (tax 1946).

7 T.C. 413 (Budd v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Metcalf v. Commissioner
31 T.C. 596 (U.S. Tax Court, 1958)
Seltzer v. Commissioner
22 T.C. 203 (U.S. Tax Court, 1954)
Mandel v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
185 F.2d 50 (Seventh Circuit, 1950)
Leslie v. Commissioner
10 T.C. 807 (U.S. Tax Court, 1948)
Budd v. Commissioner
7 T.C. 413 (U.S. Tax Court, 1946)