- 9 - inequitable to hold the spouse seeking relief liable for the substantial understatement. Many taxpayers tried unsuccessfully to obtain relief under section 6013(e), even after it was amended in 1984. In order to make relief from joint and several liability more accessible, Congress, in 1998, repealed section 6013(e) and enacted section 6015. See Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206, sec. 3201(a), 112 Stat. 734; H. Conf. Rept. 105-599, at 249 (1998). Section 6015 provides several avenues of relief, one of which is section 6015(b)(1). See Cheshire v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 183, 189 (2000). Although some of the provisions of section 6015 have no analog in former section 6013(e), section 6015(b)(1) is similar to former section 6013(e)(1). In analyzing section 6015(b)(1), we may look to cases interpreting former section 6013(e)(1) for guidance. See Cheshire v. Commissioner, supra; Butler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 276, 283 (2000). Petitioner seeks relief under section 6015(b)(1) from joint and several liability for the deficiency determined by respondent with respect to the IRA and interest distributions (collectively, the distributions) received by Ms. Braden during 1995.8 8Petitioner originally sought relief under former sec. 6013(e). The parties subsequently stipulated that “the innocent spouse issue in this case is governed by” sec. 6015. Petitioner abandoned his argument under sec. 6015(c) at trial.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011