Under the terms of a consent order respecting her separation from her husband, the taxpayer received half of her husband's net monthly retirement annuity. She received part of these payments from her husband, and the balance directly from his pension administrator. In accordance with the consent order's characterization of this arrangement as a "division of marital property," which was supported by the fact that payments were computed on the after-tax annuity amounts to the husband, Lamarre J. found that the payments were not a superannuation or pension benefit to the taxpayer, and therefore she was not required to include them in income, stating (at para. 34) that "an agreement to share income from a source is not a transfer of entitlement to that income."
Topics and taglines
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
337418
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Emond v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2012 DTC 1252 [at 3719], 2012 TCC 304 (Informal Procedure)",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Emond v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2012 DTC 1252 [at 3719], 2012 TCC 304 (Informal Procedure)",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}