- 10 -
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.” Sec.
6015(b)(2).
Where a taxpayer seeks to establish a lack of knowledge as
to an item giving rise to an understatement of tax, the taxpayer
must show that he acted as a reasonably prudent person and, where
called for, inquired as to the facts of that item in order to
determine its proper tax treatment. Stevens v. Commissioner, 872
F.2d 1499, 1505 (11th Cir. 1989), affg. T.C. Memo. 1988-63;
Butler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. at 284. Where, as here, a
taxpayer on notice that his spouse had unreported income but not
the exact amount of income, fails to fulfill a “duty of inquiry”,
that taxpayer will ordinarily be charged with either actual or
constructive knowledge of the tax return deficiency. Hayman v.
Commissioner, 992 F.2d 1256, 1262 (2d Cir. 1993), affg. T.C.
Memo. 1992-228; Demirjian v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-22;
Cohen v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1987-537 (stating that the
provisions providing relief from joint and several liability are
“designed to protect the innocent, not the intentionally
ignorant”); see also sec. 1.6015-3(c)(2)(iv), Income Tax Regs.
(“deliberate effort to avoid learning about the item” may, with
other factors, be tantamount to actual knowledge).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011