- 22 - event, the record suggests that she would have substantial equity in the residence after satisfaction of those tax liabilities and discharge of any other liens. Petitioner’s situation is dissimilar to the situations of those taxpayers who were living at or near poverty level at the time of their request for relief from joint and several liability and who proved that they would suffer economic hardship without relief. See, e.g., Washington v. Commissioner, 120 T.C. at 149-150; Foor v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-54; Ferrarese v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-249; August v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-201; Rowe v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-325. On the record in this case, petitioner has not persuaded us that the economic hardship factor weighs in favor of granting her relief. In order to satisfy the knowledge or reason to know factor under the circumstances of this case, petitioner must establish that it was reasonable for her to believe that intervenor would pay the additions to tax and interest at the times that she signed those returns. See, e.g., Ewing v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. at 47-48; Hopkins v. Commissioner, 121 T.C. at 88-89; Washington v. Commissioner, supra at 150-151; Morello v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-181; Keitz v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-74; Foor v. Commissioner, supra; Ogonoski v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-52; Wiest v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-91; Collier v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-144.Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011