Fay Dalton, Petitioner, and Robert Dalton, Intervenor - Page 7




                                        - 7 -                                         
          King v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 118 (2000).  No relief may be                
          granted under section 6015 to a taxpayer who files a stand-alone            
          petition for such relief and whose liability was paid in full               
          before the effective date of section 6015.  See Brown v.                    
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-187.  Respondent asks us to decide,           
          however, the extent to which a taxpayer may qualify for relief              
          under section 6015 where the taxpayer’s liability arose prior to            
          the effective date of section 6015, but where only a portion of             
          the liability remained unpaid as of the date of enactment.                  
               Recently, in Flores v. United States, 51 Fed. Cl. 49 (2001),           
          the Court of Federal Claims ruled on this issue.  The court                 
          considered and granted, under section 6015(f), relief with                  
          respect to a taxpayer’s entire tax liability including the                  
          portion of the liability that was paid prior to July 22, 1998,              
          the effective date of section 6015.  The court stated:                      

               Congress * * * intended the effective date provision to                
               be consonant with the remainder of the statute, thereby                
               allowing the innocent spouse relief of section 6015(b)                 
               and (c), and with them the relief afforded by section                  
               6015(f), to apply to any liability for a particular                    
               taxable year providing it was not fully paid as of the                 
               effective date.  [Id. at 55.]                                          

               In support of its holding in Flores, the Court of Federal              
          Claims compared the effective date language of section 6015 to              
          the language of section 6511(a) that triggers the statute of                








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011