In re McIntyre, 222 F.3d 655 (9th Cir. 2000)-ERISA's anti-alienation provision, 29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(1), does not protect from the IRS a spouse's community property interest in pension benefits. Here, Mrs. McIntyre objected to the IRS's levy of the whole of her husband's pension benefits on the grounds that, under California law, the interest of her husband (the delinquent taxpayer) in those benefits extends only to half of their face value. However, this court pointed out that the applicable Family Code provision referred to "'equal interests' in the whole of the community property rather than in terms of 'exclusive' interests in only half of the community property."
This court previously held that "by granting creditors recourse against the whole community estate on debts of only one spouse, California law 'implicitly' establishes that spouse's 'interest' in the whole of the community property, at least to a degree sufficient for the IRS to impose tax liens under the Internal Revenue Code." See Babb v. Schmidt, 496 F.2d 957, 960 (9th Cir. 1974). Additionally, the Internal Revenue Code states that no other federal law shall exempt property from the IRS's authority to levy a delinquent taxpayer's property. See 26 U.S.C. § 6334(c).
