- 10 - petitioner, and he testified that he knew Ms. Morrison received monthly Social Security payments. The parties failed to report the correct liability because they relied on their return preparer’s assessment that the entire benefit award was not taxable. In such situations Where the understatement results from “a misapprehension of the income tax laws by the preparers of the tax returns and the signatory parties,” both husband and wife are perceived to be “innocent” and there is “no inequity in holding them both to joint and separate liability”. * * * Hayman v. Commissioner, supra at 1262 (quoting McCoy v. Commissioner, 57 T.C. 732, 735 (1972)). Taking into account all the facts and circumstances, holding petitioner and Ms. Morrison jointly and severally liable would not be inequitable. II. Relief Under Section 6015(b)(2) If an electing spouse does not know or have reason to know of the extent of an understatement, under section 6015(b)(2) an individual may qualify for partial relief from joint and several liability. To qualify, the electing spouse must establish that, in signing the return, he or she did not know or have reason to know of a portion of the understatement. In addition, he or she must satisfy all other requirements of section 6015(b)(1) with respect to that portion. See Vetrano v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 272, 281 (2001)); sec 1.6015-2(e)(1) Income Tax Regs. Section 6015(b)(2) provides:Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011