- 10 -
Significant Benefit
The record does not indicate that petitioner benefited
beyond normal support from not paying the 1998 joint liability.
As articulated in Ewing v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 32, 45 (2004),
this factor weighs in favor of granting relief.
Source of the Liability and Noncompliance With Federal Income Tax
Laws
These two factors are neutral. First, the record reflects
that the 1998 joint liability was attributable to both petitioner
and Mr. Wollow. Second, there is no evidence that petitioner has
not made a good-faith effort to comply with the Federal income
tax laws since 1998.
Conclusion
Petitioner’s main contention in this proceeding has been
that, because the 1998 joint liability was ultimately paid from
her separate property rather than from her and Mr. Wollow’s
community property, she is entitled to equitable relief.
Although we understand petitioner’s frustration with the apparent
lack of fairness, such circumstances alone are not grounds for
relief under section 6015(f). Petitioner knew when the 1998
joint return was filed that she had an obligation to pay the 1998
joint liability and that some of her assets would be used to pay
it. The fact that respondent applied her 1999 tax refund to the
1998 tax liability instead of waiting for the bankruptcy court to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011