- 10 -
liability, and the amount of the claimed refund before signing
the return. Such is especially true given the extraordinarily
large amount of income (but for the shelter loss) realized by the
Albins in each subject year and the fact that Albin was neither
evasive nor deceitful with petitioner as to their finances.9 See
Reser v. Commissioner, 112 F.3d 1258, 1267-1268 (5th Cir. 1997)
(“Tax returns setting forth ‘dramatic deductions’ will generally
put a reasonable taxpayer on notice that further investigation is
warranted. A spouse who has a duty to inquire but fails to do so
may be charged with constructive knowledge of the substantial
understatement and thus precluded from obtaining innocent spouse
relief.” (Fn. ref. omitted.)), affg. in part and revg. in part
T.C. Memo. 1995-572; Hayman v. Commissioner, 992 F.2d 1256, 1262
(2d Cir. 1993) (“Tax returns setting forth large deductions, such
as tax shelter losses offsetting income from other sources and
substantially reducing or eliminating the couple’s tax liability,
generally put a taxpayer on notice that there may be an
understatement of tax liability.”), affg. T.C. Memo. 1992-228;
Levin v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1987-67 (spouse requesting
relief from joint and several liability had a duty to inquire
9 We believe that the reasonable taxpayer in the position of
petitioner also would have been mindful that the Albins were able
to own and maintain various pieces of real estate during the
subject years and were able to accumulate a significant amount of
cash to use in 1987 as a downpayment on their now primary
residence.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011