(1) No federal preemption in treating military disability benefits as marital property subject to division in divorce actions. (2) Division of benefits affirmed where H elected for tax reasons to receive part of his retirement benefits as disability payments.
Veteran’s disability payments are income for purposes of determining maintenance. (See detailed concurring opinion).
To the extent disability payments replace a disabled spouse’s post-divorce wages, they are income and are individual property, not subject to division at divorce. Alternatively, to the extent disability benefits replace deferred compensation, it is subject to property division at divorce.
Wife was entitled to husband’s disability benefits where husband opted to received disability benefits in lieu of pension benefits.
It was not error for trial court to refuse to value office equipment by taking into account generation of income tax deductions for depreciation.
A trial court may deduct a self-employed individual’s depreciation expense in calculating his or her net available income for the purpose of determining spousal or child support.
Inclusion of depreciation upon real estate to determine ability to pay is discretionary. It was payee’s (wife’s) burden to prove tax deduction was only a paper transaction. Here, there was no abuse of discretion in excluding the deduction.
Court can consider depreciation costs as business expense as part of the overall economic circumstances in determining income for child support.
Court did not abuse its discretion by not adding back depreciation to rental properties to determine income available for child support.
Court did not misuse discretion by refiguring payor’s income by using MACRS depreciation tables.