- 2 -
nonrequesting spouse, petitioner Stanley K. Baumann (Stanley),
did not object when the requesting spouse, petitioner Tomi L.
Baumann (Tomi), amended the deficiency petition to include the
claim for relief under section 6015, Stanley now objects after
respondent determined that Tomi qualifies for relief. Stanley
objects by arguing that, despite Stanley’s being allowed to
participate in respondent’s determination whether Tomi qualified
for relief, respondent nonetheless abused his discretion in
granting relief under section 6015(f) because respondent did not
examine all the facts and circumstances as required under section
6015(f). The issue for decision is whether respondent abused his
discretion in granting Tomi relief from joint and several
liability under section 6015(f). We hold that he did not.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Background
Petitioners, while married, timely filed their joint Federal
income tax return for 1998. Respondent sent a joint notice of
deficiency to petitioners on April 4, 2001, in which respondent
determined an income tax deficiency against petitioners of
$11,756 for 1998 and an accuracy-related penalty of $2,351 under
section 6662(a). The deficiency was attributable to respondent’s
disallowing gambling losses in excess of gambling income under
section 165(d) instead of allowing Stanley to claim his gambling
losses against income from his drywall construction business.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011