From the plaintiff's point of view, Chan v. Butcher is a stronger case than this one. There, the employee made no contributions to the disability program plan. The plan was fully funded by the employer, and the latter continued to pay the plaintiff out of its own funds an amount equivalent to salary during her periods of absence. The central issue in Chan v. Butcher was whether money received under that particular disability plan was properly characterized as in the nature of insurance, and therefore non-deductible, or alternatively in the nature of wages or salary, in which case it would be deductible. In the present case I think it quite clear that the intrinsic nature of the plan is consistent with what it purports to be, namely, one of disability insurance.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.