- 58 -
reported on petitioners' 1991 and 1992 tax returns. Therefore,
she satisfies the requirement of section 6015(b)(1)(C). Cf.,
Cheshire v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. at 192-193; Charlton v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. at 340.
We must next decide whether Barbara satisfies section
6015(b)(1)(D). Section 6015(b)(1)(D) requires a determination of
whether, taking into account all other facts and circumstances,
it is inequitable to hold Barbara liable for the tax. A
determination under this provision of the statute is essentially
factual.
The term "inequitable", as defined in section 1.6013-5(b),
Income Tax Regs., is as follows:
Whether it is inequitable to hold a person liable for
the deficiency in tax * * * is to be determined on the
basis of all the facts and circumstances. In making
such a determination a factor to be considered is
whether the person seeking relief significantly
benefited, directly or indirectly, from the items
omitted from gross income. However, normal support is
not a significant "benefit" for purposes of this
determination. * * * Other factors which may also be
taken into account, if the situation warrants, include
the fact that the person seeking relief has been
deserted by his spouse or the fact that he has been
divorced or separated from such spouse.
In the instant case, Raymond used the money from his sports
memorabilia activity primarily to purchase more collectibles. He
did use some of the money for groceries, bills, and other items
of ordinary support for the family. The use of omitted income
for ordinary support of the family does not constitute a
Page: Previous 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011