Search the Pension Law Library

1. 69 T.C. 1055; 1 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1610 — Kiddie v. Commissioner
   IRCCourt RulingsMar 30, 1978
   Sterrett, Judge: Respondent, on April 30, 1976, issued a statutory notice of deficiency in which he determined the following deficiencies in petitioner’s Federal corporate income taxes: Taxable year Deficiency 1971 .... ..$7,962.31 1972 .... ..16,972.52 1973 .... ...4,613.50 Due to concessions made by the parties the s…
2. 39 T.C. 1055 — Cohen v. Commissioner
   IRCCourt RulingsMar 27, 1963
   Withe y, Judge: Respondent has determined a deficiency in the income tax of petitioners for the year 1958 in the amount of $23,100.99. Petitioner claims an overpayment in his income tax for 1958. The issues presented for our decision are (1) whether gain realized by petitioner Theodore H. Cohen upon the transfer of cer…
3. ERISA § 206(d)(4)(B) (29 U.S.C. § 1056) — Form and payment of benefits
   ERISACode / StatuteJan 6, 2025
   …d under the plan, and (d)(4)(C) (C) in a case in which the survivor annuity requirements of section 1055 of this title apply with respect to distributions from the plan to the participant, if the participant has a spouse at the time at which the offset is to be made— (d)(4)(C)(i) (i) either— (d)(4)(C)(i)(I) (I) such sp…
4. 73 T.C. 5; 1 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1614 — Garland v. Commissioner
   IRCCourt RulingsOct 4, 1979
   …ship employees under the principles set forth in Thomas Kiddie, M.D., Inc. v. Commissioner, 69 T.C. 1055, 1060-1061 (1978).
5. ERISA § 203(a)(2)(B) (29 U.S.C. § 1053) — Minimum vesting standards
   ERISACode / StatuteJan 6, 2025
   … participant dies (except in the case of a survivor annuity which is payable as provided in section 1055 of this title).
6. T.C. Summary Opinion 2005-103 — Basman Ahmad & Khitam Amerneh v. Commissioner
   IRCCourt RulingsJul 25, 2005related by meaning
   settlement agreement is not a qualified domestic order, and Mr. Ahmad is not an alternate payee, the exception in section 72(t)(2)(C) is inapplicable. In light of the foregoing, the Court holds that petitioners are liable for the 10-percent additional tax imposed under section 72(t). Reviewed and adopted as the report …
7. 108 T.C. No. 5 — George & Elam Campbell v. Commissioner
   IRCCourt RulingsFeb 18, 1997related by meaning
   ioner's retirement distribution's being taxed twice. We think petitioners' contention is meritorious. Here we take note of the long-standing principle that double taxation is to be avoided unless expressly intended by Congress. E.g., Maass v. Higgins , 312 U.S. 443, 449 (1941); United States v. Supplee-Biddle Hardware …
8. ERISA § 204(c)(2)(B) (29 U.S.C. § 1054) — Benefit accrual requirements
   ERISACode / StatuteJan 6, 2025
   …g at normal retirement age, using an interest rate which would be used under the plan under section 1055(g)(3) of this title (as of the determination date). (c)(2)(C) (C) For purposes of this subsection, the term "accumulated contributions" means the total of— For purposes of this subparagraph, the term "mandatory cont…
9. 97 T.C. 237; 97 T.C. No. 14 — Guilzon v. Commissioner
   IRCCourt RulingsAug 6, 1991related by meaning
   f the matter is that the payment in question should be taxable to petitioner under section 72(e). Accordingly, we sustain respondent’s determination.6 In order to take into account what appear to be mechanical errors in respondent’s calculations and to afford the parties a further opportunity to resolve the question of…
10. T.C. Memo. 2002-130 — Ray C. & Bernadette B. Baas v. Commissioner
    IRCCourt RulingsMay 29, 2002related by meaning
    is Court. Section 72(t) provides that: (1) * * * If any taxpayer receives any amount from a qualified retirement plan (as defined in section 4974(c)), the taxpayer's tax * * * shall be increased by an amount equal to 10 percent of the portion of such amount which is includible in gross income. Section 72(t)(2) provides…
11. T.C. Summary Opinion 2017-64 — Wilfred Omoloh v. Commissioner
    IRCCourt RulingsAug 16, 2017related by meaning
    en of proving that those determinations are erroneous.4 See Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. I11, 115 (1933). I. Section 72(t) Additional Tax Section 72(t)(1) imposes an additional tax on an early distribution from a qualified retirement plan equal to 10% of the portion of the amount that is includable in gros…
12. ERISA § 113(b)(1)(C)(ii) (29 U.S.C. § 1032) — Notice and disclosure requirements with respect to lump sums
    ERISACode / StatuteJan 6, 2025
    (b)(1)(C)(ii) (ii) the qualified joint and survivor annuity (as defined in section 1055(d)(1) of this title); (b)(1)(D) (D) A statement that— (b)(1)(D)(i) (i) a commercial annuity comparable to the annuity available from the plan may cost more than the amount of the lump sum amount, and (b)(1)(D)(ii) (ii) it may be adv…
13. 115 T.C. No. 5 — Wan B. & Cecilia Lo v. Commissioner
    IRCCourt RulingsJul 31, 2000
    …rk, Inc. v. Commissioner , 98 T.C. 511, 514-515 (1992); Paula Constr. Co. v. Commissioner , 58 T.C. 1055, 1058-1059 (1972),
14. 154 T.C. No. 6 — Sandra M. Conard v. Commissioner
    IRCCourt RulingsMar 10, 2020related by meaning
    sis test. FIe] , further, as applied to P, I.R.C. sec. 72(t) is valid because the age and disability classifications established by the statute bear a reasonable relationship to a legitimate Government purpose. Sandra M. Conard, pro se. Scott W. Forbord and Mark J. Miller, for respondent. OPINION TORO, Judge: A taxpaye…
15. T.C. Summary Opinion 2005-78 — Hossam Helmy El-Bibany & Salma Hassan Kandil v. Commissioner
    IRCCourt RulingsJun 8, 2005related by meaning
    gher education - 6 - expenses for the taxpayer or the taxpayer’s spouse to the extent such distributions do not exceed the taxpayer’s qualified higher education expenses for the taxable year, sec. 72(t)(2)(E), (7). A. Health Insurance Premiums A distribution qualifies under section 72(t)(2)(D) if it was made from an in…
16. T.C. Memo. 2010-263 — Ernestine Forrest v. Commissioner
    IRCCourt RulingsDec 2, 2010related by meaning
    wers v. Commissioner, 24 T.C. 199, 239 (1955), affd. 247 F.2d 233 (2d Cir. 1957), affd. sub nom. Bonney v. Commissioner, 247 F.2d 237 (2d Cir. 1957)); see also sec. 1 165-1(d) (2) (i), Income Tax Regs. This is especially true in a case involving insurance. Section 165(a) prohibits a taxpayer from deducting any amount c…
17. T.C. Summary Opinion 2003-83 — Manuel Francisco Palomo & Jane Lyon Potter v. Commissioner
    IRCCourt RulingsJun 24, 2003related by meaning
    tract unless such amounts are specifically excluded from gross income under other provisions of chapter 1 of the Code. The burden is on petitioners to demonstrate that the payments in question fall into a specific statutory exclusion. See Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co. , 348 U.S. at 429-431. Under section 72(t), a …
18. T.C. Memo. 1997-324 — Douglas R. Prince, D.D.S., M.S., P.C. v. Commissioner
    IRCCourt RulingsJul 15, 1997
    …vg. and remanding on another issue T.C. Memo. 1980-282; Paula Constr. Co. v. Commissioner , 58 T.C. 1055, 1058 (1972), affd. without published
19. T.C. Memo. 1997-277 — Margaret M. Merker v. Commissioner
    IRCCourt RulingsJun 18, 1997related by meaning
    r personal injuries or sickness to the extent such amounts are (A) attributable to - 11 - 7 Former sec. 105(d) provided a limited exclusion from gross income for amounts received in lieu of wages prior to attaining age 65 by completely disabled persons retired on disability. Sec. 105(d) was repealed by sec. 122(b) of t…
20. 35 T.C. 1217 — Searl v. Commissioner
    IRCCourt RulingsMar 31, 1961related by meaning
    ntract” as meaning the entire contract, especially since Congress, when it wished to delineate the annuity feature of the contract, did so explicitly. Although admitting that the interpretation proposed by petitioner is not without merit, we hold that section 72(d) applies only when the entire consideration furnished b…