- 13 -
There is no dispute that petitioner meets the remaining six
eligibility requirements of Rev. Proc. 2000-15, section 4.01.
Therefore, we find that petitioner is eligible to seek relief
under section 6015(f).
IV. Petitioner’s Entitlement To Equitable Relief Under Section
6015(f)
A. Factors for Determining Whether To Grant Equitable
Relief Under Section 6015(f)
Rev. Proc. 2000-15, section 4.03, 2000-1 C.B. at 448
provides in pertinent part:
The Secretary may grant equitable relief under section
6015(f) * * * if, taking into account all the facts and
circumstances, it is inequitable to hold the requesting
spouse liable for all or any part of the * * *
liability * * *.
Rev. Proc. 2000-15, section 4.03, further provides “a partial
list of positive and negative factors that will be taken into
account” in determining the appropriate relief under section
6(...continued)
used to make the payment for which he or she seeks a refund”. It
also must be shown that the payments were not made with the joint
return and were not joint payments or payments that the
nonrequesting spouse made. Therefore, it appears that petitioner
would be eligible to seek a refund of her tax payment under Rev.
Proc. 2003-61, were it applicable. It further appears that, on
the basis of our conclusion in Washington v. Commissioner, 120
T.C. 137, 158-159 (2003), that the term “unpaid tax” in sec.
6015(f)(1) refers to tax reported on a return but not paid with
the return rather than to amounts remaining unpaid when sec.
6015(f) relief is requested, respondent has abandoned the window
period requirement of sec. 4.01 of Rev. Proc. 2000-15, even for
tax years covered by that revenue procedure. See Ziegler v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-282.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011