- 41 -
tax problems from IRS Revenue Officer Clark. At the time of
signing the individual tax returns for the years 1979, 1980, and
1981, Mrs. Gaskins was not alerted to inquire further into Mr.
Gaskins' business dealings.
Based on our review of these factors as applied to Mrs.
Gaskins, we hold that Mrs. Gaskins did not know, and had no
reason to know, of the substantial understatements of Mr.
Gaskins' income when signing their Federal income tax returns
for the taxable years 1979, 1980, or 1981.
Inequity of Holding Mrs. Gaskins Liable
Mrs. Gaskins argues it is inequitable to hold her liable
because she has not benefited from any unreported income, and
the family has suffered many hardships. Respondent alleges that
Mrs. Gaskins has not proved it would be inequitable to hold her
liable.
To qualify for innocent spouse relief, the taxpayer must
show that, given all the facts and circumstances, it would be
inequitable to hold the taxpayer liable for the tax deficiency
attributable to the substantial understatement of the other
spouse. Sec. 6013(e)(1)(D). One factor to consider is whether
the taxpayer seeking relief significantly benefited from the
erroneous items of the other spouse, here unreported income.
Estate of Krock v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 672, 677 (1989). Normal
support is not a significant-benefit. Sec. 1.6013-5(b), Income
Tax Regs.; Estate of Krock v Commissioner, supra at 678-679;
Page: Previous 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011