- 14 -
her partnership items to nonpartnership items and remove her from
these proceedings.
In sum, Mrs. Locke may not harness the bankruptcy rule as an
expedient to ride Mr. Locke's coattails out of these TEFRA
proceedings. We hold that Mrs. Locke's partnership items did not
convert to nonpartnership items at the time that Mr. Locke's
partnership items converted to nonpartnership items pursuant to
the bankruptcy rule, and, therefore, she remains a party subject
to this Court's jurisdiction.
Allocation of Partnership Items
By amended petitions the Lockes request that this Court
determine the proper allocation of partnership items between
them.7 Mrs. Locke maintains that, even if she remains a party to
these proceedings, her joint and several liability neither endows
her with a separate ownership interest in Mr. Locke's partnership
investments nor creates partnership items allocable to her.
Thus, she requests that we allocate 100 percent of the
partnership investments to Mr. Locke and zero percent to her.
Nothing in either the bankruptcy rule or the statute allows
such an allocation of partnership items between spouses.
7
Sec. 6226(f) vests this Court with subject matter
jurisdiction to determine all partnership items of the
partnership for the partnership taxable year to which the FPAA
relates and the proper allocation of such items among the
partners.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011