Legal Fees Identified as Third party Support

Washington

A portion of my ex-wife's legal fees were identified as support; they meet the criteria of support in the other 4 criteria, but do not contain suspension of payments upon death.

This support payment was a one-time payment of $4000, but because I was unemployed, I was permitted to pay it over a period of time with no increase in amount or interest. The IRS auditor is saying that eveni f it was paid all immediately and at once; it still could not be considered support because there is no death clause.

Both parties considered it support, the court called it support, and the lawyer accepted the payment as support.

Is this a valid interpretation? Is there a precedence which states otherwise?

Never, Never be a "Pro Se" even if you go broke with attorney fees!!!!!!

Here's part of the code section on alimony:
Sec. 71. - Alimony and separate maintenance payments
(a) General rule

Gross income includes amounts received as alimony or separate maintenance payments.

(b) Alimony or separate maintenance payments defined

For purposes of this section -

(1) In general

The term ''alimony or separate maintenance payment'' means any payment in cash if -

(A) such payment is received by (or on behalf of) a spouse under a divorce or separation instrument,

(B) the divorce or separation instrument does not designate such payment as a payment which is not includible in gross income under this section and not allowable as a deduction under section 215,

(C) in the case of an individual legally separated from his spouse under a decree of divorce or of separate maintenance, the payee spouse and the payor spouse are not members of the same household at the time such payment is made, and

(D) there is no liability to make any such payment for any period after the death of the payee spouse and there is no liability to make any payment (in cash or property) as a substitute for such payments after the death of the payee spouse.


Section D says that there must be no liability to continue payments after death. It does *not* say that the court order must specifically state that payments terminate on death. If your state's divorce laws say that all maintenance/alimony payments terminate on the death of the recipient or payor, that satisfies section D. Call a divorce lawyer & ask if there is such a state law or a case holding that alimony terminates automatically on death. Hand a copy of the case/law to the auditor, along with a copy of IRC section 71 & tell him to buzz off.

Well, I was bored and Washington *is* my home state, so I found the statute for you. Congratulations, you win! Hand the auditor a copy of this law & IRC 71 & tell him to stop wasting your time.


RCW 26.09.170
Modification of decree for maintenance or support, property disposition -- Termination of maintenance obligation and child support -- Grounds.

(1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (7) of RCW 26.09.070, the provisions of any decree respecting maintenance or support may be modified: (a) Only as to installments accruing subsequent to the petition for modification or motion for adjustment except motions to compel court-ordered adjustments, which shall be effective as of the first date specified in the decree for implementing the adjustment; and, (b) except as otherwise provided in subsections (5), (6), (9), and (10) of this section, only upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances. The provisions as to property disposition may not be revoked or modified, unless the court finds the existence of conditions that justify the reopening of a judgment under the laws of this state.

(2) Unless otherwise agreed in writing or expressly provided in the decree the obligation to pay future maintenance is terminated upon the death of either party or the remarriage of the party receiving maintenance.