- 12 -
(2) the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know that the
reported liability would be unpaid at the time the return was
signed; (3) the requesting spouse significantly benefited (beyond
normal support) from the unpaid liability; (4) the requesting
spouse will not suffer economic hardship if relief is denied; (5)
the requesting spouse has not made a good faith effort to comply
with Federal income tax laws in the tax years following the tax
year to which the request for relief relates; and (6) the
requesting spouse has a legal obligation pursuant to a divorce
decree or agreement to pay the unpaid liability. In addition,
Rev. Proc. 2000-15, sec. 4.03, 2000-1 C.B. at 448-449, states:
"No single factor will be determinative of whether equitable
relief will or will not be granted in any particular case.
Rather, all factors will be considered and weighed
appropriately." Furthermore, the list of aforementioned factors
is not intended to be exhaustive.
In deciding whether respondent’s determination that
petitioner is not entitled to relief under section 6015(f) was an
abuse of discretion, we consider evidence relating to all the
facts and circumstances. The Commissioner's exercise of
discretion is entitled to due deference; in order to prevail, the
taxpayer must demonstrate that in not granting relief, the
Commissioner exercised his discretion arbitrarily, capriciously,
or without sound basis in fact or law. Woodral v. Commissioner,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011