- 10 -
parties disagree, however, regarding whether it is inequitable to
hold petitioner liable for the 1998 deficiency assessment, taking
into account all of the relevant facts and circumstances. Sec.
6015(f)(1). Consequently, we must decide whether respondent
abused his discretion in determining that petitioner was not
entitled to relief under section 6015(f).6 Cheshire v.
Commissioner, 115 T.C. 183, 198 (2000), affd. 282 F.3d 326 (5th
Cir. 2002); Butler v. Commissioner, supra at 291-292.
Pursuant to section 6015(f), the Commissioner has prescribed
procedures in Rev. Proc. 2000-15, supra, that are to be used in
determining whether an individual qualifies for relief under that
section.7 Rev. Proc. 2000-15, sec. 4.01, lists seven threshold
conditions that must be satisfied before the IRS will consider a
request for relief under section 6015(f). Subsequent to our May
14, 2003, order, respondent eliminated Rev. Proc. 2000-15, sec.
4.01(4), as a threshold condition for relief in this case.
Respondent concedes that the remaining threshold conditions are
satisfied in this case.
5(...continued)
divorced, legally separated, or otherwise living apart. Refunds
are not available under section 6015(c). Sec. 6015(g)(3).
6We consider respondent’s July 3, 2003, determination as the
final determination in this case.
7On Aug. 11, 2003, the Commissioner issued Rev. Proc. 2003-
61, 2003-32 I.R.B. 296, which supersedes Rev. Proc. 2000-15,
2000-1 C.B. 447, effective for requests for relief filed on or
after Nov. 1, 2003.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011