Ingrid Capehart - Page 38

                                       - 38 -                                         
          requesting spouse’s right to allocate liability under section               
          6015(c), requires the Commissioner to prove that the requesting             
          spouse had actual knowledge of the factual basis for the denial             
          of the deductions.  Id. at 204; see also Mora v. Commissioner,              
          117 T.C. 279 (2001) (requirement that a requesting spouse have              
          actual knowledge of an item giving rise to the deficiency                   
          requires proof of more than a taxpayer’s knowledge that an item             
          appears on the return).                                                     
               Like section 6015(c)(3)(C), Rev. Proc. 2000-15, supra,                 
          requires, for purposes of section 6015(f), that the requesting              
          spouse’s knowledge of the items giving rise to the deficiency be            
          examined.  In order to ascertain the level of the requesting                
          spouse’s knowledge of the items giving rise to the deficiency for           
          purposes of section 6015(f), we must examine whether the                    
          requesting spouse knew or had reason to know of the factual basis           
          for the denial of the deductions.  See King v. Commissioner,                
          supra at 204; Mora v. Commissioner, supra at 291-292.                       
               In this case, respondent conceded, for purposes of section             
          6015(c), that he could not prove that petitioner had actual                 
          knowledge of the items giving rise to the deficiency.  With                 
          respect to section 6015(f), our review of the record convinces us           
          that petitioner did not have actual knowledge of the items giving           
          rise to the deficiency.  However, we still must decide whether              
          petitioner had reason to know of the items giving rise to the               






Page:  Previous  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011