Philip H. and Anna Friedman - Page 10

                                                 - 10 -                                                    
                  Husband, and the Wife shall endorse refund checks such                                   
                  [sic] payment.  If there is any deficiency or tax                                        
                  liability assessed on any jointly filed tax return,                                      
                  such deficiency or tax liability, with any interest or                                   
                  penalties thereon, shall be paid solely by the Husband,                                  
                  and the said Husband does hereby forever save, hold                                      
                  harmless, indemnify and defend the Wife of, from and                                     
                  against any and all claim or claims that may be made                                     
                  against them or her for the payment, collection or                                       
                  satisfaction of any such tax, interest or penalty due                                    
                  or alleged to be or become due as a result of the                                        
                  filing and/or failure to file any such joint tax                                         
                  return.  * * *  The cost, if any[,] incurred or to be                                    
                  incurred by either of the parties in connection with                                     
                  the examination and/or audit of any such joint return                                    
                  shall be borne solely and exclusively by the Husband.                                    
                  On April 9, 1992, petitioner, with Philip's consent, filed                               
            for a divorce.  Petitioner asserts that she and Philip were                                    
            divorced during 1992.  As of the time of trial (April 6, 7, and                                
            8, 1992), the separation agreement was still in effect; however,                               
            petitioner and Philip continued to live together at the same                                   
            location.                                                                                      
                                                 OPINION                                                   
                  The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit outlined                                
            its mandate to this Court as follows:                                                          
                         The resolution of this issue [whether it would be                                 
                  inequitable to hold petitioner jointly liable for the                                    
                  tax deficiencies] depends upon a fact-intensive inquiry                                  
                  into the surrounding facts and circumstances.  I.R.C.                                    
                  �6013(e)(1)(D).  Relevant factors include significant                                    
                  benefits received as a result of the understatements by                                  
                  the spouse claiming relief, any participation in                                         
                  wrongdoing on the part of the "innocent" spouse, and                                     
                  the effect of a subsequent divorce or separation.  See                                   
                  S. Rep. No. 1537, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970)                                            
                  (considering bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of                                  
                  1954), reprinted in 1970 U.S.C.C.A.N. 6089, 6092.                                        
                  Normal support, measured by the circumstances of the                                     
                  parties, is not considered a significant benefit for                                     
                  purposes of this determination.  Flynn, 93 T.C. at 367                                   



Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011