Close

Articles Posted in CPAVille

Updated:

Dot Your I’s and Cross Your T’s: the IRS is a Tough Grader, Especially for Dependency Exemptions and Child Tax Credits (McBride v. Comm’r)

By: Dana M. Horlick, Attorney, Woodruff Family Law Group

McBride v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2015-6, 2015 WL 393011 (2015) (a) Facts: The taxpayer, his grown son and daughter, and his daughter’s child all lived in the same household. On her federal tax return, the daughter claimed an exemption for her child. On his federal tax return, the taxpayer claimed dependency…

Updated:

In a Battle of Acronyms, a QDRO Protects Your Retirement Account from ERISA Preemption (VanderKam v. VanderKam)

By: Dana M. Horlick, Attorney, Woodruff Family Law Group

VanderKam v. VanderKam, 776 F.3d 883 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (a) Facts: Before the parties were divorced, the wife was the death beneficiary of the husband’s retirement plan. The parties were divorced in Texas. Their divorce decree was silent on survivor benefits, but awarded the husband all rights existing because of his employment. After…

Updated:

Make Haste when Entering QDROs; Delay can be Costly (Yale-New Haven v. Nicholls)

By: Dana M. Horlick, Attorney, Woodruff Family Law Group

Yale-New Haven v. Nicholls, 788 F.3d 79 (2d Cir. 2015) (a) Facts: A husband and wife were divorced in Connecticut in 2008. The divorce decree incorporated a settlement agreement, which provided that the husband would transfer to the wife half of the marital share of his retirement benefits. No QDRO was entered…

Updated:

A Gift by Any Other Name is Still a Gift in the Court’s Eyes (Hughes v. Comm’r)

By: Dana M. Horlick, Attorney, Woodruff Family Law Group

Hughes v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2015-89, 2015 WL 2180505 (2015) (a) Facts: A husband owned stock in a consulting business that was growing in value. He was afraid that if he retained the stock, his former wife would seek to reopen their divorce decree. He therefore gave the stock to his…

Updated:

Pay On Time and in Cash or You Can Forget About that Alimony Deduction (Muniz v. Comm’r)

By: Dana M. Horlick, Attorney, Woodruff Family Law Group

Muniz v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2015-125, 2015 WL 4126356 (2015) (a) Facts: A Florida separation agreement provided that the husband would pay wife $1,000 per month in alimony. The husband did not pay on time, and the court entered an enforcement order directing the husband to pay $6,000 in alimony due under…

Updated:

Alimony, Separation Agreements, and Attorney Fees: 2015 Tax Court (Milbourne v. Comm’r)

Milbourne v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2015-13, 2015 WL 393040 (2015) (a)  Facts: A husband and his wife separated. She proposed a separation agreement, which required him to pay $6,000 per month in alimony. The husband refused to sign this agreement, as he did not want to pay more than $2,500 per…

Updated:

Alimony Arrearages and Federal Tax Consequences (Iglicki v. Comm’r)

Iglicki v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 2015-80, 2015 WL 1886010 (2015) (a)  Facts: A Maryland separation agreement required a husband to pay $735 per month in child support to a wife. If the husband defaulted on child support, he would immediately become liable for $1,000 per month in spousal support. Liability…

Updated:

Divisible Property in Equitable Distribution

North Carolina General Statutes Section 50-20(b) (4) defines divisible property. Divisible property covers certain values created post-separation. A husband that continued to work in a dental practice post-separation did not create active appreciation.   Husband did not change anything about his business methods to increase business. The growth between the date…

Updated:

A Lost Alimony Deduction by Linking to Child Support

Watch out for those hurried, last minute North Carolina agreements that link alimony and child support termination; you could get an unintended tax consequence and the loss of the tax deduction. While the Johnson case, discussed herein, is not a North Carolina case, it could be.  Guys and gals, you…

Updated:

Tax Dangers of Unallocated Family Support (Baur v. Comm’r)

It is tempting to lump child support and post separation support/alimony into a bucket of one dollar amount, sometimes referred to as “family support”.  This is particularly tempting in the early part of a case, but it is DANGEROUS.  A couple of tax rules will help: Rule 1:  Don’t create…

Contact Us