Beverly Gordon - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         
          Mr. Gordon's motion                                                         
               In his motion for reconsideration, Mr. Gordon asks that we             
          reconsider our holding with respect to the equitable estoppel               
          issue.  In that motion, Mr. Gordon essentially restates the                 
          arguments that he made on brief and has not shown any unusual               
          circumstances or substantial error.  Accordingly, we shall deny             
          Mr. Gordon's motion.                                                        
          Ms. Gordon's Motion                                                         
               In her motion for reconsideration, Ms. Gordon asks that we             
          reconsider our holding with respect to the innocent spouse issue            
          and for the first time advances arguments relating to the impact            
          of section 1256(f)(3)(B) and Mr. Gordon's alleged hedging activi-           
          ties on the resolution of that issue.  Ms. Gordon argues that we            
          erred in finding that she failed to show that the 1988 NOL                  
          deduction is a grossly erroneous item within the meaning of                 
          section 6013(e)(2)(B) because "respondent has never contended               
          that Mr. Gordon's hedging allegations, or the existence of                  
          �1256(f)(3)(B), provided a basis for finding that his claimed               
          1986 net trading loss did not constitute a grossly erroneous                
          item."  Ms. Gordon had the burden of proving that she satisfied             
          the requirements of section 6013(e)(2)(B).  Her burden was not              
          altered as a result of respondent's having advanced in support of           
          respondent's position under section 6013(e)(2)(B) reasons other             
          than those relating to the hedging exception in section                     
          1256(f)(3)(B), which other reasons we rejected in our Opinion.  A           

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011