- 13 -
in the instant case because the factual predicate for an innocent
party under the Federal forfeiture law is not equivalent to that
for an innocent spouse under section 6013(e).
Under the Federal forfeiture law, an owner's interest in
real property is exempt from forfeiture on account of any act
performed without the knowledge of that owner. 21 U.S.C. sec.
881(a)(7) (1995). This section has been interpreted to employ a
subjective rather than an objective standard for assessing the
owner's knowledge. United States v. One Parcel of Land Located
at 7326 Highway 45 North, 965 F.2d 311 (7th Cir. 1992). 21
U.S.C. section 881(a)(7) does not inquire whether the owner
should have known of illegal activities taking place on the
property. Id. at 315. Instead, 21 U.S.C. section 881(a)(7)
focuses on the owner's actual knowledge. Id.; United States v.
Real Property & Improvements Located at 5000 Palmetto Drive, 928
F.2d 373, 375 (11th Cir. 1991); United States v. $10,694.00 U.S.
Currency, 828 F.2d 233, 234-235 (4th Cir. 1987); United States v.
Four Million Two Hundred Fifty-Five Thousand, 762 F.2d 895, 906
(11th Cir. 1985).
Therefore, 21 U.S.C. section 881(a)(7) does not deal with
whether a person had reason to know of illegal activity, nor does
it deal with whether it is inequitable to hold such person liable
for tax. Accordingly, a finding in a party's favor under the
Federal forfeiture law does not preclude a finding that such
party is not an innocent spouse under section 6013(e).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011