Gwendolyn A. Ewing - Page 40




                                       - 40 -                                         
          12-month period.  Sec. 6015(c)(3)(A)(i).  Relief under section              
          6015(c), like relief under section 6015(b), requires an                     
          affirmative election by the taxpayer, sec. 6015(a)(2), and the              
          presence of a deficiency, e.g., sec. 6015(c)(1) (an individual              
          who makes the separate liability election is liable for a                   
          “deficiency which is assessed with respect to the [joint] return            
          * * * [in an amount not to exceed] the portion of such deficiency           
          properly allocable to the individual”).  Third, section 6015(f)             
          authorizes the Secretary to grant equitable relief from joint               
          liability when neither of the first two types of relief is                  
          available.  Relief under section 6015(f), which the conferees               
          referred to as “equitable relief”, H. Conf. Rept. 105-599, supra            
          at 251, 1998-3 C.B. at 1005, was not available under former                 
          section 6013(e).  In contrast with the other two types of relief,           
          equitable relief does not require the presence of a deficiency.             
               Petitioner’s petition to this Court is a “stand alone”                 
          petition, Fernandez v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 324, 329 (2000),              
          that was filed under section 6015(e)(1) seeking only equitable              
          relief under section 6015(f).  By virtue of the fact that her               
          1995 joint return did not generate a deficiency, petitioner does            
          not qualify for, nor has she ever sought, modified innocent                 
          spouse relief or the separate liability election under section              
          6015(b) and (c), respectively.  This case is the first instance             
          where this Court has decided whether section 6015(e) allows the             






Page:  Previous  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011