Drain v. Comm'r
Opinion
PURSUANT TO
Decision will be entered for respondent.
GERBER,
Petitioners resided in Arizona when they timely filed their petition. In 2007 Ms. Drain received $14,526 in SSD benefits.
Petitioners have adamantly contended that SSD benefits are not taxable. In part, their argument is based on their belief that the benefits have already been taxed and *57 to tax them again would be double taxation. Their belief is based on the fact that the Government collects their payments into the Social Security system along with and in the same manner as the income tax and/or that they made the payments with after-tax dollars. We understand how petitioners feel; unfortunately, however, their argument is unavailing, as explained in
Petitioners' second argument is that SSD benefits are excludable under section 104. It is well established that SSD benefits are includable in income under section 86 and are not excludable as workmen's compensation benefits under section 104(a)(1),
To reflect the foregoing,
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.