- 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