- 11 -
testimony to be credible. In addition, petitioner’s testimony is
corroborated by the fact that her former spouse did pay the tax
balances due as reported on the couple’s jointly filed income tax
returns. Accordingly, we conclude that petitioner had no
knowledge that her former spouse would not pay, albeit at some
later date, the tax due with their 1995 return.
Petitioner further claims that she had no reason to know
that her former spouse would not pay the 1995 tax liability. She
points out that her former spouse was responsible for paying the
household expenses, including installment payments to the IRS.
Petitioner’s access to the joint checking account was through her
former spouse. Additionally, petitioner had no access to her
former spouse’s separate business checking account. It was
petitioner’s former spouse’s practice to file their joint tax
return late, to make no payment with the return, and to enter
into an installment agreement with the IRS. Although petitioner
signed the 1995 tax return in March 1997 and was aware of the tax
due, petitioner had no reason to believe that her former spouse
would not pay the tax liability. In fact, petitioner’s former
spouse handled the tax matters with the IRS and had paid any
taxes due for years prior to 1995. Contrary to respondent’s
position, we conclude that petitioner did not have reason to know
that the income tax for the taxable year in issue would not be
paid by her former spouse.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011