John Maier III - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         
          under section 6213(a), and respondent has not made any other                
          determination with regard to petitioner that would confer                   
          jurisdiction upon the Court.                                                
               Petitioner filed an opposition to respondent’s motion to               
          dismiss.  He contends that respondent’s administrative                      
          determination granting Ms. Maier relief from joint and several              
          liability for the years 1990 to 1994 deprived him of due process            
          of law, is contrary to section 6015(g)(2), and, absent review by            
          this Court, he will be deprived of a judicial remedy.                       
               Pursuant to notice, this matter was called for hearing at              
          the Court’s motions session in Washington, D.C.  Petitioner and             
          counsel for respondent appeared at the hearing and offered                  
          argument with regard to respondent’s motion to dismiss.                     
               Section 6013(d)(3) provides that if a husband and wife file            
          a joint Federal income tax return, “the tax shall be computed on            
          the aggregate income and the liability with respect to the tax              
          shall be joint and several.”  However, section 6015(a) provides             
          that, notwithstanding section 6013(d)(3), an individual who has             
          made a joint return may elect to seek relief from joint and                 
          several liability on such return.  For a detailed discussion of             
          the legislative history of section 6015 (and its predecessor                
          section 6013), see Cheshire v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 183, 188-             
          189 (2000), affd. 282 F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2002).                             

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011