Moloney v. Comm'r

2006 T.C. Summary Opinion 53, 2006 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 144
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedApril 17, 2006
DocketNo. 21859-04S
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2006 T.C. Summary Opinion 53 (Moloney 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
Moloney v. Comm'r, 2006 T.C. Summary Opinion 53, 2006 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 144 (tax 2006).

Opinion

MELISSA L. MOLONEY, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Moloney v. Comm'r
No. 21859-04S
United States Tax Court
T.C. Summary Opinion 2006-53; 2006 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 144;
April 17, 2006, Filed

*144 PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b), THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.

Melissa L. Moloney, Pro se.
Bradley C. Plovan, for respondent.
Chiechi, Carolyn P.

CAROLYN P. CHIECHI

CHIECHI, Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of section 7463 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect at the time the petition was filed. 1 The decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion should not be cited as authority.

Respondent determined a deficiency of $ 1,377 in petitioner's Federal income tax for her taxable year 2002.

The issue remaining for decision is whether petitioner is required to include in gross income for her taxable year 2002 a $ 4,372 award that she received in that year. We hold that she is.

Background

*145 Virtually all of the facts have been stipulated by the parties and are so found.

At the time petitioner filed the petition in this case, she resided in Baltimore, Maryland.

Throughout the period 1996 through 1999, the Federal Stafford Loan (Subsidized and Unsubsidized) Program made educational loans totaling approximately $ 55,000 to petitioner that she used to pay expenses that she incurred in attending law school (petitioner's law school loan). Neither the note nor any other documents relating to that loan provided that petitioner's law school loan would be forgiven if petitioner were to work after law school for the Baltimore County State's Attorney's Office (State's Attorney's Office).

In 2002, the Janet L. Hoffman Loan Assistance Repayment Program (LARP), through the Maryland Higher Education Commission, offered petitioner an award of $ 4,372 for the 2002-2003 award year (petitioner's LARP award) that was to be used to repay part of petitioner's law school loan. The letter by which petitioner was notified of petitioner's LARP award (petitioner's LARP award notification letter) stated in pertinent part:

You are being offered a Janet L. Hoffman Loan Assistance Repayment*146 Program (LARP) award for the 2002-2003 award year.

Please sign and return the LARP award letter and certification form to the Office of Student Financial Assistance within three weeks of the date on the award letter. * * *

Please be aware of the following information regarding your LARP award.

1. The LARP award will be sent to you in the form of a dual-payee check made out to both you and the lender with whom you have the highest loan indebtedness.

2. Two dual-payee checks will be sent to you, one in November and one in March. The first employment verification form is included in your application form. The second employment verification form will be sent in February. The March check will be sent after your second employment verification form has been received. If your employment verification is not received within the allowed time, your LARP award will be canceled.

3. The LARP award is renewable next year, but is subject to change in light of your financial condition and the number of years you have received LARP assistance.

4. You are responsible for contacting your lender to discuss how the LARP award will affect payment for this year.

5. This LARP*147 award can only be used with the lender specified on the award letter. It is your responsibility to pay your loans with other lenders.

6. The LARP award is considered taxable income for the year that the actual payment is received. It is your responsibility to declare it as such on your income tax return.

To accept the LARP award, you must maintain full-time employment with the state or local government or a nonprofit organization. * * *

If you change employment and the new employer is ineligible, you will be required to repay the LARP award on a prorated basis to the Office of Student Financial Assistance.

In order to qualify for petitioner's LARP award, petitioner was required to be a so-called public servant. During 2002, petitioner worked for the State's Attorney's Office. Such work qualified petitioner as a public servant for purposes of petitioner's LARP award. Petitioner's LARP award of $ 4,372 was determined on a sliding scale based upon petitioner's salary at the State's Attorney's Office.

On May 31, 2002, petitioner accepted petitioner's LARP award of $ 4,372 and signed the financial aid notification acceptance letter that she received from the Maryland*148 Higher Education Commission. That letter stated in pertinent part:

The Maryland Higher Education Commission is pleased to offer you financial aid for the 2001-2002 2 award year. These funds are intended to assist you with the repayment of your educational loan with the lender listed below. Please be aware that this offer may change or be cancelled if you change employers. * * *

Neither the Janet L. Hoffman Loan Assistance Repayment Program nor the Maryland Higher Education Commission refinanced or agreed to assume all or part of petitioner's law school loan in connection with the grant to petitioner of petitioner's LARP award of $ 4,372.

At the time in 2002*149 petitioner was offered petitioner's LARP award, the lender of petitioner's law school loan was Sun Tech., Inc. Thereafter, AFSA became the owner of petitioner's law school loan.

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)
Porten v. Commissioner
1993 T.C. Memo. 73 (U.S. Tax Court, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2006 T.C. Summary Opinion 53, 2006 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moloney-v-commr-tax-2006.