Cindy Driggers - Page 3

                                        - 3 -                                         
          Honeycutt.  The assessed deficiency and penalty were not paid by            
          either petitioner or Mr. Honeycutt.2                                        
               Petitioner and Mr. Honeycutt were separated in 1992 and                
          divorced sometime after 1992.  Petitioner timely filed her                  
          individual Federal income tax return for the taxable year 1992,             
          claiming a refund of $1,403.  The refund was applied as an offset           
          in partial payment of the outstanding 1979 joint tax liability.             
          The transcript of account reflects the offset as a payment made             
          April 15, 1993.  After the offset of the overpayment in 1993,               
          petitioner contacted respondent by telephone.3  Petitioner                  
          expressed the view that it was improper for respondent to offset            
          her overpayment from her individual liability and apply the                 
          credit to a joint liability which was the responsibility of Mr.             
          Honeycutt.  There are no letters or other written documents in              



               2  Sec. 6015(g) governs the allowance of credits and refunds           
          to the extent attributable to the application of sec. 6015.  In             
          general, sec. 6015 applies to any liability for tax arising on or           
          before July 22, 1998 but remaining unpaid as of such date.  See             
          Washington v. Commissioner, 120 T.C. 137, 153-154 (2003).  In the           
          present case, petitioner’s tax liability arose in 1979, but there           
          remained an unpaid balance as of July 22, 1998, even after the              
          application of the 1992 overpayment.  Respondent’s records                  
          indicate an account balance of zero as of Nov. 25, 2002, because            
          the period of limitations on collection expired on the                      
          outstanding balance.  However, since there was an unpaid balance            
          as of July 22, 1998, we conclude that petitioner may avail                  
          herself of sec. 6015.                                                       
               3  There are some vague statements by petitioner of a letter           
          written to respondent after the offset but there is nothing                 
          specific in this record reflecting that letters were sent.                  





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011