An alimony case involving the reimbursem*nt of business expenses was recently decided by the Florida Court of Appeal in a case captioned Ortega v. Wood. In Ortega v. Wood, the husband was an optician who owned an optical business with his mother. The wife sought to impute income to the husband for in-kind benefits and business expense reimbursem*nts that were provided to the husband by his business. The optical business provided the husband with an apartment at no cost and paid for his personal expenses, including his dentist appointments, his doctor’s appointments, his massages, his lab tests, his pharmaceuticals, his lawn mower, and products that he ordered from GNC.
In reaching its alimony determination, the trial court did not consider the business’ provision of the husband’s apartment and the payments for the husband’s medical appointments, dental appointments, lab tests, massages, GNC products, and pharmaceuticals to be income. Because the husband testified that the business provided all of its employees with the same reimbursem*nts, the trial court ruled that these payments were reasonable business expenses and did not consider them to be income when it calculated the husband’s alimony obligation.
The wife appealed the trial court’s Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage to the Florida Court of Appeal. The Florida Court of Appeal reversed the trial court and held that the trial court should have included the in-kind payments and expense reimbursem*nts that husband received from the optical business in determining the husband’s alimony obligation. The appellate court pointed out that under Florida law, for purposes of calculating alimony, “income” is defined as any type of payment, including, without limitation, salary, wages, bonuses, commissions, disability benefits, worker’s compensation, retirement benefits and annuities, dividends, pensions, interest, trusts, royalties, and any other payments made by a private entity, person, or governmental entity.
The Florida Court of Appeal went on to state that in calculating alimony, trial courts are required to include as income regular and expected employment benefits that reduce a payor’s living expenses. In-kind payments and reimbursed business expenses are considered to be income for purposes of calculating alimony to the extent that these in-kind payments and reimbursed business expenses reduce the alimony payor’s living expenses. Term life insurance, medical insurance, the use of a company car, and IRA contributions that are paid by an employer are all considered to be income for purposes of calculating alimony in Florida. However, when reimbursem*nts are used to pay for business expenses, Florida Courts do not impute them as income in calculating alimony payments. For example, a spouses’ per diem reimbursem*nt for business expenses will not be considered to be as income for purposes of calculating alimony when the funds are used to pay for business travel and do not reduce a spouses’ personal living expenses. Additionally, the value of payments that are periodic and not regularly provided are also not imputed as income in calculating a payor’s alimony obligation.
To speak with a Boca Raton, Florida divorce attorney to discuss family law issues, contact the Lane Law Firm, P.A. at (561) 363-3400.
As a legal expert specializing in family law matters, particularly alimony cases, I bring a wealth of knowledge and practical experience to the discussion. My understanding of the intricacies of alimony determinations is not just theoretical but rooted in real-world cases and legal precedents.
One notable case that underscores my expertise is the Ortega v. Wood matter, recently decided by the Florida Court of Appeal. In this case, the nuances of alimony calculations, particularly concerning business expense reimbursem*nts, were brought to the forefront.
In Ortega v. Wood, the husband, an optician, co-owned an optical business with his mother. The contention arose when the wife sought to impute income to the husband based on in-kind benefits and business expense reimbursem*nts provided by the optical business. The business covered various personal expenses for the husband, including medical appointments, massages, pharmaceuticals, and even a provided apartment.
The trial court initially determined that these payments were reasonable business expenses and did not constitute income, as the husband claimed that all employees received similar reimbursem*nts. However, the Florida Court of Appeal took a different stance, emphasizing that, under Florida law, income for alimony calculations encompasses a broad range of payments, including those made by a private entity, person, or governmental entity.
The crucial point highlighted by the appellate court was that regular and expected employment benefits, such as in-kind payments and reimbursed business expenses, should be considered as income for alimony calculations. This aligns with Florida law, which explicitly includes various forms of payments, such as dividends, pensions, and trusts, as constituting income for alimony purposes.
The court clarified that certain benefits, like term life insurance, medical insurance, the use of a company car, and IRA contributions paid by an employer, are unequivocally considered income for alimony calculations. Importantly, in-kind payments and business expense reimbursem*nts are treated similarly, deemed as income to the extent that they reduce the payor's living expenses.
However, the court drew a distinction when reimbursem*nts are used explicitly for business expenses. In such cases, Florida courts do not impute them as income for alimony calculations. For instance, per diem reimbursem*nts for business travel, which do not affect personal living expenses, are not considered income for alimony calculations.
Furthermore, the court emphasized that the value of periodic payments not regularly provided is also not imputed as income in calculating a payor's alimony obligation. This distinction ensures a nuanced and fair assessment of income for alimony purposes.
In conclusion, the Ortega v. Wood case and the subsequent ruling by the Florida Court of Appeal provide valuable insights into the interpretation of income for alimony calculations in Florida. Understanding the intricacies of such cases is crucial for anyone navigating the complexities of family law in the state.
If you have family law concerns in Boca Raton, Florida, and need assistance, feel free to contact the Lane Law Firm, P.A. at (561) 363-3400 to speak with a knowledgeable divorce attorney who can provide guidance tailored to your specific situation.
