Miley v. Comm'r

2002 T.C. Memo. 236, 84 T.C.M. 330, 2002 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 241
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedSeptember 19, 2002
DocketNo. 683-00
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2002 T.C. Memo. 236 (Miley v. Comm'r) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Miley v. Comm'r, 2002 T.C. Memo. 236, 84 T.C.M. 330, 2002 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 241 (tax 2002).

Opinion

ROBERT B. AND DAISY A. MILEY, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Miley v. Comm'r
No. 683-00
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 2002-236; 2002 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 241; 84 T.C.M. (CCH) 330; T.C.M. (RIA) 54878;
September 19, 2002, Filed

*241 Decision was entered for respondent.

Robert B. and Daisy A. Miley, pro se.
C. Teddy Li, for respondent.
Colvin, John O.

COLVIN

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

COLVIN, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency of $ 3,261 in petitioners' 1997 Federal income tax. After concessions, the sole issue for decision is whether petitioners may exclude from income disability payments that petitioner Robert B. Miley (petitioner) received under a disability policy in 1997. We hold that they may not.

Section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for 1997. Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

             FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.

A. Petitioners

Petitioners are married and resided in Glen Burnie, Maryland, when they filed their petition.

Petitioner worked for Hearth Home Doors, LLC (Hearth Home) in January 1997. He earned about $ 450 a week at that time. On his 16th day of work in 1997, petitioner was injured in an automobile accident. His injuries caused him to miss several months of work. He never returned to work for Hearth Home.

*242 B. Petitioner's Disability Payments

Hearth Home was the plan holder for a disability insurance policy issued by Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America (Guardian) that covered petitioner. Guardian paid disability payments to petitioner totaling $ 7,618 from January 17 to July 17, 1997, less amounts Guardian withheld for Social Security and Medicare taxes.

C. Petitioners' 1997 Return

In February 1998, Hearth Home issued to petitioner a Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, which stated that he received $ 9,149 in wages in 1997. Petitioners did not report any income from Hearth Home or Guardian on their 1997 tax return or attach the Form W-2 from Hearth Home to their 1997 return.

                OPINION

Petitioners contend that Guardian's payments to petitioner of $ 7,618 were nontaxable disability benefits. 1

*243 Gross income includes all income from whatever source derived. Sec. 61(a). Exclusions from income are a matter of legislative grace and are construed narrowly. Commissioner v. Schleier, 515 U.S. 323, 328, 132 L. Ed. 2d 294, 115 S. Ct. 2159 (1995). Taxpayers bear the burden of proving that they are entitled to exclude the amounts claimed. 2Rule 142(a)(1).

Disability benefits are excludable from gross income under section 104(a)(3)3 or section 105(c)4 if certain requirements are met. However, as discussed next, we conclude that those requirements are not met.

*244 A. Whether Petitioner's Disability Payments Are Excludable as Amounts Received Through Accident or Health Insurance

Gross income does not include amounts received through accident or health insurance for personal injuries or sickness to the extent those amounts are: (1) Attributable to contributions by the employer which were includable in the gross income of the employee, or (2) paid by the employee. Sec. 104(a)(3). Petitioner's disability payments were received through accident or health insurance for personal injuries or sickness for purposes of sections 104(a)(3) and 105(c). See Trappey v. Commissioner, 34 T.C. 407, 408 (1960); Andrews v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo 1992-668. Thus, petitioner may exclude the disability payments under section 104(a)(3) if the payments were attributable to premiums paid by his employer that were included in petitioner's gross income.

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

Related

Commissioner v. Schleier
515 U.S. 323 (Supreme Court, 1995)
Trappey v. Commissioner
34 T.C. 407 (U.S. Tax Court, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2002 T.C. Memo. 236, 84 T.C.M. 330, 2002 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 241, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miley-v-commr-tax-2002.