Reply to Sucks for the higher-earning spouse

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Sucks for the higher-earning spouse"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Fools on here !!!
The law is not retroactive, so all existing divorce settlements remain as-is (the payor takes the deduction).

As to new divorce settlements, the tax will be factored into the settlement. The payor will pay much less. Keep in mind alimony in general is a very rare thing these days, and even then it’s usually limited to a very short timeframe. [/quote]

Good to see there are one or two rational people reading and posting to DCUM.  I understand now what Trump means by "fake news".

Judges know what the tax rules are.  [b]They also know women don't pay taxes on their alimony even though they are supposed to[/b].  This change in the tax law saves the Treasury money, and won't increase the burden on divorcing husbands.  [/quote]

I think it would be hard to avoid doing this as the alimony is reported on the Husband's tax return.  If the wife doesn't claim it the IRS is going to ask questions.  The amount of things you can hide from the IRS is much smaller now with form matching and this isn't one of those things you can hide.

As a lawyer I think your final statement is questionable.  There are ways to structure the distribution of assets such that some of it goes through as alimony to take advantage of the delta between a significantly higher earning spouse vs. a lower earnings spouse.  Whether this is a good social policy or not is debatable but Congress clearly thought this favorable method of structuring asset distributions should be eliminated.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics