-62-
the bad debt loss, therefore, is not due to a grossly erroneous
item. Accordingly, Mrs. Jones is not entitled to innocent spouse
status with regard to this adjustment.
Knowledge of Understatements on the Returns
To be entitled to relief as an innocent spouse, Mrs. Jones
must show that, in signing the joint returns for the years in
issue, she did not know and had no reason to know of the
substantial understatements of tax. Sec. 6013(e)(1)(C).
In Stevens v. Commissioner, supra, the Court of Appeals for
the Eleventh Circuit, in refusing to grant innocent spouse
relief, approved our application of its "reason to know"
standard. The Court of Appeals stated that the "reason to know"
standard is based on whether a "reasonably prudent taxpayer under
the circumstances of the spouse at the time of signing the return
could be expected to know that the tax liability stated was
erroneous or that further investigation was warranted." Id. at
1505; see also Sanders v. United States, 509 F.2d 162 (5th Cir.
1975). The test establishes a "duty of inquiry" on the part of
the alleged innocent spouse. Stevens v. Commissioner, supra. As
pointed out in Mysse v. Commissioner, 57 T.C. 680, 699 (1972), a
spouse cannot close her eyes to facts that might give her reason
to know of unreported income. Furthermore, the alleged innocent
spouse's role as homemaker and complete deference to the
husband's judgment concerning the couple's finances, standing
alone, are insufficient to establish that a spouse had no "reason
to know." Stevens v. Commissioner, supra at 1506.
Page: Previous 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011