Gerald Dennis Strong - Page 12




                                       - 12 -                                         
          1992 and 1993 tax returns and Bell’s June 2, 1998, letter to                
          Beatson in which Bell stated:  “No audit was made of joint tax              
          returns filed for 1992, 1993 and, [sic] 1995.”                              
               Mary’s separate 1994 tax return was filed on or after July             
          12, 1998.  Mary did not file a 1994 separate tax return before              
          that date, even though her withholding was not enough to cover              
          what would have been her 1994 tax liability on a married-filing-            
          separately basis.  On her separate 1994 tax return, Mary reported           
          her Form W-2 income (rounded to $28,685) and taxable interest               
          income ($184), for an adjusted gross income of $28,869.  These              
          are the same amounts that appear on the joint tax return, which             
          also shows a breakdown on Schedule B, Interest and Dividend                 
          Income, of income by payor.  On the separate 1994 tax return,               
          Mary claimed the standard deduction for married filing                      
          separately--$3,175.  The joint tax return shows $57,099 on                  
          Schedule A, Itemized Deductions, after applying the 7.5-percent             
          floor for medical expenses and the 2-percent floor for                      
          miscellaneous deductions.  Mary’s separate 1994 tax return shows            
          a $4,033 liability and, after a $2,536 credit for withholding               
          (rounded from the Form W-2 amount), a $1,497 amount owed.  The              
          record does not indicate whether (1) Mary paid the amount owed,             
          or any interest thereon, or any late filing addition to tax, or             
          (2) respondent disallowed Mary’s standard deduction because of              
          section 63(c)(6)(A).                                                        






Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011