Philip Cullen - Page 17

                                       - 17 -                                         
          obligation to pay his and Ms. Cullen’s nontax debts incurred                
          prior to their divorce, he introduced no evidence as to his                 
          current assets and/or net worth.  Other than 3 months of bank               
          statements in 2003, petitioner likewise introduced no evidence of           
          his basic living expenses or other current debts that would show            
          he could not pay his current reasonable basic living expenses.              
          Although petitioner testified that he had a fixed income for 2003           
          of approximately $800 per month, the bank statements reflect                
          monthly deposits of between $950 and $1,050.  The record does not           
          explain the source of the additional deposited funds or the                 
          apparent discrepancies of $150 to $250 per month in petitioner’s            
          deposits versus his claimed monthly income.  Petitioner’s                   
          inconsistency on this point further weighs against him.  See                
          Ogonoski v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-52.                               
               The other three factors are neutral to petitioner.  There              
          was no spousal abuse,  the decree of divorce did not assign the             
          legal obligation to pay the Federal income tax at issue to either           
          spouse, and there was no evidence introduced at trial that                  
          petitioner had not made a good faith effort to comply with the              
          Federal tax laws after 1999.                                                
               Of the factors weighing against relief, the most important             
          is present here and is the primary reason we deny petitioner’s              
          requested relief.  That factor is petitioner’s actual knowledge,            
          when signing under penalty of perjury and filing the joint tax              






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