- 25 -
aware that loans were obtained to finance the purchase of the
property.
The evidence in the record reflects that petitioner knew
that Lots 22 and 27 and the Anorada property were purchased, and
she knew that she was listed as a joint owner of the property.
Petitioner has failed to establish that the items should be
allocated in a manner other than in proportion to petitioner’s
and Mr. Rowe’s respective ownership interests. Accordingly,
these items are allocable evenly between petitioner and Mr. Rowe.
Therefore, to the extent petitioner lacked actual knowledge of
these items, she will qualify for relief from joint liability
under section 6015(c) for the portion of the item allocable to
Mr. Rowe.13
2. Actual Knowledge
Respondent maintains that petitioner had actual knowledge of
the capital gain income from the sales of Lots 22 and 27 and the
Anorada property because petitioner was a co-owner of the
properties, she signed the settlement statements, and she
endorsed the settlement checks. Petitioner claims that she was
unaware of any gain on the sale of Lots 22 and 27 because she did
not have access to financial records, and she relied on Mr.
13Because petitioner cannot qualify for relief under sec.
6015(c) for the portions of items which are allocable to her, we
analyze her ability to qualify for relief for such portions in
our later discussion under sec. 6015(b) and (f). See infra pp.
53-61.
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011