- 152 -
We hold for respondent on this issue.38
IV. Innocent Spouse Relief
Petitioner contends that he is entitled to innocent spouse
relief for 1986 under section 6013(e), because he separated from
Betsy in September of that year and did not see Markette’s 1986
tax return. Respondent contends that petitioner is not entitled
to innocent spouse relief.
We agree with respondent.
Section 6013(a) permits a husband and wife to elect to file
a joint tax return. Together with section 1(a), this joint tax
return option is a valuable privilege, which ordinarily operates
to lower the tax liability for the income reported on the joint
tax return. The price taxpayers must pay for this benefit is
joint and several liability. Sec. 6013(d)(3); Stevens v.
Commissioner, 872 F.2d 1499, 1503 (11th Cir. 1989), affg. T.C.
Memo. 1988-63; Murphy v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 111, 117 (1994);
Bokum v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 126, 151-152 (1990), affd. 992
38 Ordinarily, when the item should be deductible in one
of two years and both of these years are before us, a taxpayer
does not lose the deduction entirely merely because of failure to
prove which of the two years is the correct one. However, in the
instant cases the interest deduction is properly an item of
Betsy’s, and petitioner and Betsy did not file a joint tax return
for 1988. Accordingly, petitioner’s failure to carry his burden
of proof for 1987 means that he has lost the deduction entirely,
even though Betsy apparently would be entitled to a 1988
deduction on account of the interest payment.
Page: Previous 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011