Gerrish v. Commissioner
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
FAY,
The facts have been fully stipulated and are so found.
Petitioners, Samuel D. Gerrish and Gabrielle Gerrish, resided in Boulder, Colo., when*73 they filed their petition herein.
For 323 days in 1978 petitioners resided in a government compound located in Woomera, South Australia (herein the Woomera location), where petitioner Samuel D. Gerrish (petitioner) was employed as a physicist by Aerojet Electro Systems (Aerojet) in connection with a United States government defense contract. During the taxalbe year in issue, section 911 provided exclusions from gross income for individuals who, because of their employment, resided in a "camp located in a hardship area." For purposes of section 911, the term "hardship area" was defined in section 913(h)(2) as any foreign place designated by the Secretary of State as a hardship post where extraordinarily difficult living conditions, notably unhealthful conditions, or excessive physicial hardships exist and for which a
(A) is provided under
(B) would be so provided if officers and employees of the Government of the United States were present at that place. [Emphasis added.]
See sec. 911(c)(1)(C).
Based on the fact that they lived at the Woomera location in 1978, on their 1978*74 return petitioners claimed an exclusion from gross income of $17,698 under section 911. In his notice of deficiency, respondent disallowed this exclusion.
The only issue herein is whether in 1978 petitioners resided in a "hardship area" within the meaning of sections 911(c)(1)(C) and 913(h)(2). 2 Resolution of this issue depends solely on whether the Woomera location is or would be provided a "post differential of 15 percent or more" as required in section 913(h)(2).
In 1979 a representative of the Secretary of State notified Aerojet by letter that "the Woomeral location qualifies for a differential at the
There is simply no connection between a cost-of-living allowance provided military officers under
Accordingly, since the Secretary of State determined that the Woomera location qualifies for a post differential of only ten percent, it does not qualify as a "hardship area" under section 913(h)(2). Thus, petitioners are not entitled to any exclusion from gross income under section 911.
To reflect the foregoing,
Footnotes
1. Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended and in effect during the year at issue.↩
2. Respondent does not contest whether petitioners resided in a "camp" within the meaning of sec. 911. See sec. 911(c)(1)(B).↩
3. This determination that the Woomera location qualified for a post differential of only ten percent was made in response to a "Post Differential Questionnaire" which Aerojet submitted to the Deparmment of State on behalf of its employees who resided at the Woomera location, including petitioner.↩
4. The authority to grant "post differentials" under
sec. 5925 of title 5, United States Code , has been empowered to the Secretary of State.Executive Order No. 10903 ,3 CFR, 1959-1963↩ Comp., p. 433.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.