- 7 -
would be inequitable to hold the relief-seeking spouse liable for
the deficiency attributable to the understatement. Sec.
6013(e)(1). The spouse seeking relief bears the burden of proving
that each of the four requirements has been satisfied. In other
words, failure to prove any one of the statutory requirements will
prevent innocent spouse relief. Bokum v. Commissioner, 94 T.C.
126, 138-139 (1990), affd. 992 F.2d 1132 (11th Cir. 1993).
The parties stipulated that petitioner and Mr. Pewitt filed
joint returns for 1980 through 1984 and that petitioners' 1981,
1982, 1983, and 1984 returns contained a substantial understatement
of tax due to a grossly erroneous item.
With respect to tax year 1980, the deficiency in income tax is
$480. This amount ($480) does not constitute a "substantial
understatement". A substantial understatement is an
understatement, as defined in section 6662(d)(2)(A), which exceeds
$500. Sec. 6013(e)(3). Section 6662(d)(2)(A) defines an
"understatement" as the excess of the amount of tax required to be
shown on the return over the amount of tax imposed which is shown
on the return, reduced by any rebate. Consequently, because there
is no substantial understatement involved for 1980, petitioner is
precluded from obtaining relief as an innocent spouse under section
6013(e) for that year.
We also hold that petitioner is not entitled to innocent
spouse relief for the other years under consideration, namely 1981
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011