- 19 -
particular case.13 In this case, we believe there is a
sufficiently close relationship between the parties, since
petitioner and her husband have closely aligned legal and
economic interests.
Petitioner and Elwood filed a joint Federal income tax
return for each of the tax years in issue and continued to do so
for 1989, the year in which the stipulation of settled issues was
executed by Elwood. We have previously noted that filing a joint
Federal income tax return generally results in tax savings to the
husband and wife. Benjamin v. Commissioner, 66 T.C. 1084, 1100
(1976), affd. 592 F.2d 1259 (5th Cir. 1979). However, in
accepting the benefit of filing jointly, the spouses also assume
joint and several liability for the payment of any tax due. Sec.
6013(d)(3). By filing a joint income tax return, petitioner and
Elwood entered into a joint economic arrangement, whereby they
shared the benefits and burdens associated with filing a joint
return. In addition to their economic relationship, petitioner
and Elwood were also in the legal relationship of marriage in
1989, when the stipulation was entered. Here we have two
individuals who have elected to be treated as a single taxpaying
13 We believe the flexibility inherent in such an approach
comports with the spirit of our duty of consistency
jurisprudence. See Arkansas Best Corp. v. Commissioner, 83 T.C.
640, 659 (1984), affd. in part and revd. in part as to other
issues 800 F.2d 215 (8th Cir. 1986), affd. 485 U.S. 212 (1988)
(duty of consistency does not require the presence of all the
technical elements of estoppel); Unvert v. Commissioner, 72 T.C.
807, 814 (1979) (to same effect), affd. 656 F.2d 483 (9th Cir.
1981).
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011