- 10 -
circumstances, it is inequitable to hold the other individual
liable for the deficiency in tax for such taxable year
attributable to such understatement”.4 Butler v. Commissioner,
supra at 291. Further, the equitable factors we consider under
section 6015(b)(1)(D) are the same equitable factors we consider
under section 6015(f).5 As a result, we hold that respondent did
not abuse his discretion in denying petitioner relief under
section 6015(f) for the taxable year 1996.
On the basis of all the facts and circumstances, we conclude
that respondent did not abuse his discretion in denying
petitioner relief pursuant to section 6015(f).
4 Additionally, the language in both sections is similar to
the language in former sec. 6013(e)(1)(D), “taking into account
all the facts and circumstances, it is inequitable to hold the
other spouse liable for the deficiency in tax for such taxable
year attributable to such substantial understatement”. Butler v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 276, 291 (2000); see Mitchell v.
Commissioner, 292 F.3d 800, 806 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (“Subsection (f)
has no statutory antecedent as a stand alone provision, but has
roots in the equity test of former subparagraph 6013(e)(1)(D)
carried forward into subparagraph 6015(b)(1)(D).”), affg. T.C.
Memo. 2000-332.
5 The Commissioner has announced a list of factors in Rev.
Proc. 2000-15, sec. 4.03, 2000-1 C.B. 447, 448, that the
Commissioner will consider in deciding whether to grant equitable
relief under sec. 6015(f). The revenue procedure takes into
account factors such as marital status, economic hardship, and
significant benefit in determining whether relief will be granted
under sec. 6015(f). Rev. Proc. 2000-15, sec. 4.03, 2000-1 C.B.
at 448.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011