Child support, or any payment on behalf of the child, is not alimony. In the court case, various payments qualified as alimony that were on behalf of the payee spouse. Other parts of a mortgage were not alimony because the payee spouse was not personally liable for that mortgage. This was so even though the payee spouse would have suffered if the mortgage were foreclosed on. The court also noted that state law plays an important part here.
State law determines what the property rights are between the spouses.
Federal tax law uses that state law as a base, then federal tax law dictates the tax result. The case is important in defining the reach of alimony and in noting that some payments, though not specifically designated as alimony, can still qualify for that tax treatment. Any references to products or services do not constitute or imply an endorsement or recommendation. The advice or discussion presented in this website or linked publications are not intended for use by any particular person and do not constitute the rendering of legal, accounting, financial, or other advise of any type. All intellectual property, including without limitation trademarks, trade secrets and copyrights, are the property of Robert G. Nath, Esq. and any unauthorized use thereof is strictly prohibited.