Lane

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Lane

Good Law
40 F. App'x 385
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 1, 2002No. 00-71238, 00-71334; Tax Ct. No. 16223-97; Tax Ct. No. 3401-97California766 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Virginia M. Marten appeals the U.S. Tax Court’s determination that she was deficient in paying her taxes. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue appeals the related case against Marten’s ex-husband, David E. Lane. We have jurisdiction under Internal Revenue Code § 7482(a)(1), and we affirm.

Alimony payments constitute taxable income for the receiving spouse and deductible expenditures for the paying spouse. I.R.C. § 215. Under the version of Section 71 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect at the time of Lane and Marten’s support decree, a payment qualified as alimony if it was 1) incurred by the husband under a decree of divorce or separation, or a written instrument incident to such divorce or separation; 2) made in discharge of a legal obligation based on the marital or family relationship; and 3) made periodically. I.R.C. § 71(a)(1) (1954).

Marten contends that the Tax Court should have applied the more restrictive definition of alimony adopted as part of the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (“DEFRA”), Pub.L. No. 98-369, § 422 (a), 98 Stat. 494 , 796 (1984). DEFRA’s changes apply, only to divorce or separation instruments executed after December 31, 1984, and to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.