- 3 -
(2)(C), which establishes, for purposes of calculating the
taxable amount of his Social Security benefits, a "base amount"
and an "adjusted base amount" of zero for taxpayers who were
married and lived together during the taxable year but did not
file jointly, and section 6013, which allows Ms. Clark to
unilaterally decide whether or not to file a joint return with
him, are unfair and unconstitutional.
After reviewing the record, we find that respondent properly
determined that $9,404 of petitioner's Social Security benefits
for 1995 must be included in his gross income under section 86.
The record does not show that petitioner and Ms. Clark were
legally separated under a decree of divorce or of separate
maintenance by the end of 1995. Sec. 7703(a)(2). Petitioner
also stipulated that they lived together until September 1995.
Consequently, since petitioner did not file a joint return with
Ms. Clark for 1995, his "base amount" and his "adjusted base
amount" are both zero. Sec. 86(c)(1)(C) and (2)(C); Rafter v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1991-349.
As we informed petitioner at trial, this Court is one of
limited jurisdiction, and we must apply the laws as written by
Congress. There is no provision in the Internal Revenue Code
which requires an individual taxpayer such as Ms. Clark to file a
joint return, which would make her jointly and severally liable
for the Federal income tax due on petitioner's individual income.
Sec. 6013(d)(3). With respect to the effect that Ms. Clark's
refusal to file jointly with petitioner has on the taxability of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011