Court Opinion

ID: 9713606
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:18:43.23889+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:19.548292
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE HOLDRIDGE, specially concurring: I agree with the majority’s holdings herein. I write separately on the issue of depreciation. In calculating net income under the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act (Act), the only deductions from gross income that are allowable are those specifically enumerated in the Act. 750 ILCS Ann. 5/505(a)(3) et seq. (Michie 1996). While there may be circumstances where a reduction in income for depreciation would be appropriate, the clear and unambiguous language of the Act does not permit it. I respectfully disagree with Justice Homer’s special concurrence wherein he indicates he would apply generally accepted accounting principles and hold that depreciation expenses may be deducted from net income despite the “curious wording” of section 505(a)(3)(h) of the Act. Although this suggestion may make some sense if we were writing legislation, we are not. The only way we could do this would be to ignore the plain and unambiguous language of the Act. The Act as written is clear; depreciation allowances given by the federal government as deductions against taxable income on an individual’s federal income tax return and depreciation allowances on balance sheets prepared by accountants are not “expenditures for the repayment of debt.” Simply put, depreciation is not repayment of a debt and cannot be deducted against gross income under the Act. See Gay v. Dunlap, 279 Ill. App. 3d 140 (1996). Our supreme court recently decided the case of In re Marriage of Minear, 181 Ill. 2d 552 (1998), wherein it had an opportunity to rule on this issue. Unfortunately, it chose not to decide whether a depreciation expense may ever be excluded from consideration in determining an individual’s available income. Minear, 181 Ill. 2d at 559-60. It is unfortunate that the high court chose not to resolve this issue when the opportunity was presented. Until the high court finally chooses to resolve this issue, or the legislature changes the language of the Act, courts should decline the invitation to act as a super-legislative body and rewrite the Act to allow for the adjustment of net income by the amount of the depreciation allowance claimed on the payor’s federal tax return or balance sheet.