Court Opinion

ID: 9525578
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:05:08.050078+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:15:40.103535
License: Public Domain

*739ELDER, Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the result reached by the majority but write separately to clarify my view of the holding in Smith v. Smith, 18 Va.App. 427, 444 S.E.2d 269 (1994), discussed by the majority in footnote 2. I interpret Smith to hold that contemporaneous gains must be included in the gross income calculation and that non-contemporaneous capital gains ordinarily may not be included. See id. at 434, 444 S.E.2d at 274. Determining what income is contemporaneous is an issue for the trier of fact, depending on the circumstances of each case, subject to the appropriate standard of review on appeal. Income not received contemporaneously may nevertheless serve as a basis for deviating from the presumptive amount. See Code § 20-108.1(B).