Andrew J. Zoglman - Page 11

                                       - 11 -                                         
               If an individual who, but for paragraph (1)(C), would                  
               be relieved of liability under paragraph (1),                          
               establishes that in signing the return such individual                 
               did not know, and had no reason to know, the extent of                 
               such understatement, then such individual shall be                     
               relieved of liability for tax * * * to the extent that                 
               such liability is attributable to the portion of such                  
               understatement of which such individual did not know                   
               and had no reason to know.                                             
               Upon review of the record, we conclude that petitioner knew            
          the full extent of the understatement.  Petitioner testified                
          that, at the time of signing the 1996 joint return, he knew that            
          Ms. Morrison was receiving monthly benefits.  Similarly, the                
          record also reflects that, at the time of signing the joint                 
          return, petitioner knew that Ms. Morrison applied for and                   
          received a lump-sum benefit apart from her monthly benefit.  What           
          is unclear is whether petitioner had knowledge of the amount of             
          benefits received by Ms. Morrison.  During trial, petitioner and            
          Ms. Morrison provided conflicting testimony as to whether                   
          petitioner noted the amount reflected on the benefit statement              
          when Ms. Morrison presented it to the return preparer.  In                  
          addition, the parties’ testimony conflicts as to whether the                
          parties discussed the specific amount of the benefit award.                 
               The preponderance of evidence supports our holding that                
          petitioner had knowledge of the full amount of the benefit award.           
          Petitioner encouraged and prodded Ms. Morrison into applying for            
          benefits and assisted her in the application and reconsideration            
          process.  The assistance he provided made him aware that Ms.                






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011