T.C. Summary Opinion 2003-155
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
JEAN A. WEAVER, Petitioner v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Docket No. 19154-02S. Filed October 21, 2003.
Jean A. Weaver, pro se.
Bradley C. Plovan, for respondent.
PANUTHOS, Chief Special Trial Judge: This case was heard
pursuant to the provisions of section 7463 of the Internal
Revenue Code in effect at the time the petition was filed. The
decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and
this opinion should not be cited as authority. Unless otherwise
indicated, subsequent section references are to the Internal
Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue, and all Rule
references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
- 2 -
Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner’s Federal
income tax in the amount of $660 for taxable year 2000. The
issue for decision is whether a portion of the Social Security
benefits received by petitioner in 2000 is includable in her
gross income.
Background
Some of the facts have been stipulated, and they are so
found. The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are
incorporated herein by this reference. At the time of filing her
petition, petitioner resided in Elkridge, Maryland.
During the year in issue, petitioner received Social
Security benefits totaling $8,756. Petitioner filed a Form 1040,
U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, for the 2000 taxable year.
She reflected her filing status as “single” and reported adjusted
gross income of $29,278. This amount did not, however, include
any of the $8,756 of Social Security benefits that petitioner
received during the 2000 taxable year.
Respondent contends that a portion of the Social Security
benefits petitioner received in 2000 is includable as gross
income under section 86. Petitioner contends otherwise, claiming
that taxing Social Security benefits is unfair and amounts to
double taxation.
- 3 -
Discussion
Social Security benefits are subject to income tax treatment
pursuant to section 86. The amount of such benefits to be
included in gross income is subject to a statutory formula. See
sec. 86(a) through (d). Section 86 requires inclusion of the
payments if the sum of the taxpayer’s adjusted gross income (with
certain modifications not relevant here) and one-half of the
Social Security benefits received, exceeds a specified “base
amount”. Jelle v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 63, 71 (2001). This
base amount is $25,000 for a taxpayer, like petitioner, who is
not married and did not file a joint return. See sec. 86(c)(1).
Since petitioner reported adjusted gross income of $29,278 and
received Social Security benefits totaling $8,756 during the 2000
taxable year, the base amount threshold is clearly exceeded. We
therefore sustain respondent’s determination that a portion of
$8,756 petitioner received in 2000 as Social Security benefits
must be included in petitioner’s gross income for that taxable
year.
We note that petitioner, like other taxpayers, has
questioned the fairness of section 86. See, e.g., McAdams v.
Commissioner, 118 T.C. 373, 379 (2002). However, “No scheme of
taxation, whether the tax is imposed on property, income, or
purchases of goods and services, has yet been devised which is
free of all discriminatory impact.” San Antonio Indep. Sch.
Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1, 41 (1973). And this Court has
- 4 -
repeatedly held that section 86 does not suffer any
constitutional infirmities. McAdams v. Commissioner, supra.
Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case
Division.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
for respondent.