- 10 -
petitioners’ allegation, respondent responded in his answers that
petitioners should be treated as married during the years in
issue for purposes of their Federal income tax filing status even
though their marriage was annulled in 1996.
Respondent’s clarification of the basis of his determination
that petitioners should be treated as married did not increase
the original deficiency or require the presentation of different
evidence.9 Accordingly, we conclude that petitioners bear the
burden of proof on this issue.10
B. Effect of the Annulment
Petitioners were married in October 1994. In January 1996,
Mr. Rinehart sought an annulment of petitioners’ marriage, and
the Texas State court issued a Decree of Annulment declaring
petitioners’ marriage null and void. On their 1995 and 1996
Federal income tax returns, petitioners designated their filing
status as “single”. Petitioners argue that the effect of the
Decree of Annulment was to render the marriage void from its
inception and that their filing status of “single” for 1995 and
1996 was correct, and they were also entitled to claim a filing
status of “single” for 1994.
9 The evidence regarding the annulment of petitioners’
marriage was directly related to respondent’s determination that
petitioners were married and that Texas community property laws
applied.
10 We note, however, that our resolution of this issue does
not depend on which party bears the burden of proof.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011