At issue is the treatment of an asset as marital property and a source of income. This can happen in property distributions where, for example, one assets should not be ignored when gauging the financial position of divorced spouses..."

When the financial situations of the divorced spouses are profoundly different, an absolute prohibition against double dipping creates inequities. As a result, courts, while generally opposing double dipping, have created exceptions and modifications to permit its application in selected cases, chiefly as a source of alimony.

Most courts have not opted to flatly prohibit dual consideration of martial property as asset and as a source of income.

In many jurisdictions, courts hold that when a court rules that a pension in marital property that is subject to distribution, the pension benefits distributed cannot be counted as income for purposes of alimony.

In cases of child capital gains, lottery and gambling winnings, prizes and awards, "all of which are property interests that may be equitably divided between the spouses."