Ruth Bader Ginsburg 360x1000
199
1jesusandjohnwayne
11632
1gucci
1falsewitness
1madoff
Margaret Fuller1 360x1000
7albion
Mark V Holmes 360x1000
2trap
AlexRosenberg
1lauber
1transcendentalist
299
Edmund Burke 360x1000
Spottswood William Robinson 360x1000
1defense
399
1lookingforthegoodwar
Maria Popova 360x1000
Susie King Taylor 360x1000
1trap
1albion
Susie King Taylor2 360x1000
12albion
LillianFaderman
storyparadox2
2confidencegames
7confidencegames
lifeinmiddlemarch1
Anthony McCann1 360x1000
Margaret Fuller 360x1000
6albion
Learned Hand 360x1000
2albion
4confidencegames
2lookingforthegoodwar
11albion
1lafayette
Thomas Piketty2 360x1000
Stormy Daniels 360x1000
2defense
Mary Ann Evans 360x1000
James Gould Cozzens 360x1000
3defense
1paradide
1empireofpain
8albion'
3theleastofus
Thomas Piketty3 360x1000
4albion
Margaret Fuller5 360x1000
2gucci
Thomas Piketty1 360x1000
10abion
Adam Gopnik 360x1000
499
2jesusandjohnwayne
2paradise
Gilgamesh 360x1000
5albion
9albion
13albion
Storyparadox1
3confidencegames
Margaret Fuller3 360x1000
2theleastofus
Betty Friedan 360x1000
Lafayette and Jefferson 360x1000
2lafayette
2transadentilist
14albion
1confidencegames
2falsewitness
Office of Chief Counsel 360x1000
5confidencegames
Samuel Johnson 360x1000
George F Wil...360x1000
6confidencegames
George M Cohan and Lerarned Hand 360x1000
lifeinmiddlemarch2
storyparadox3
Richard Posner 360x1000
1theleasofus
3albion
Brendan Beehan 360x1000
3paradise
Margaret Fuller4 360x1000
Tad Friend 360x1000
Maurice B Foley 360x1000
Margaret Fuller 2 360x1000
Anthony McCann2 360x1000
Margaret Fuller2 360x1000

This was originally published on PAOO June 27, 2010.

Gratisography at Pexels

There are quite a few developments in the last few months I am hoping to spout about, but I am going to skip straight to PLR 201024005. The situation is not a common one, but it is a good starting point for a discussion of the tax aspects of divorce. The taxpayer held securities that were qualified replacement property from the sale of stock to an ESOP. The requested ruling, which is favorable, holds that the transfer of the securities to the taxpayer’s spouse will not trigger gain recognition 

All well and good. The question that intrigues me is whether taxpayer’s spouse knows the implications of the settlement. In my fantasy spouse will turn the securities over to a money manager who will sell them all and end up being shocked with the resulting tax bill. There used to be a joke that there are three ways to get out of a burned-out tax shelter. The first was to put the interest into a defective grantor trust and then cure the defect. It was a really neat idea. It doesn’t actually work, but it was clever. Then there was dying. Pretty drastic, but it worked (until this year anyway). Finally, there is giving it to your spouse and getting a divorce. Still works.

The important thing to remember is that property received in a divorce has the same basis that it had to the couple. So if one spouse gets a pile of money and the other spouse gets a pile of low basis assets of equal gross value, there really hasn’t been an even split. If the couple has significant assets, this could be a much more important issue than who gets the dependency deduction. The dependency deduction seems to garner much more attention than it is worth. Ironically, despite all the attention it is not unusual to neglect to follow through on the requirement that non-custodial parents obtain a release form.

Filing joint returns, in my experience, seems to usually be taken as a given. In situations where you have reason to believe that your spouse has unreported income or even when they have a high exposure return, the smart thing could be to forgo some savings in the interest of peace of mind.

Finally, if alimony is involved you need to be aware that there are fairly complex rules to prevent alimony treatment for payments that are more in the nature of property settlement or child support.