- 17 -
party’s omission of taxable income or claim of erroneous
deductions...
Respondent contends that the fact that petitioner has a legal
obligation under the divorce decree to pay the unpaid tax
liabilities weighs against granting relief to petitioner. Rev.
Proc. 2003-61, sec. 4.03(2)(a)(iv), indicates that if Mr. Griffin
had a legal obligation under the divorce decree to pay the tax
liabilities, then that fact would weigh in favor of granting
relief to petitioner. Likewise, if the divorce decree had placed
the obligation to pay the taxes on petitioner, then that fact
would weigh against granting relief to petitioner as indicated in
Rev. Proc. 2003-61, sec. 4.03(2)(a)(iv). In the present case,
the divorce decree established that each party was liable for 50
percent of the liabilities. Therefore, this is a neutral factor.
However, the fact that the divorce decree established that each
party was liable for 50 percent of the liabilities does indicate
that petitioner had a reasonable belief that such liabilities
would not be paid in full by Mr. Griffin.
4. Significant Benefit
The examiner determined that petitioner did not
significantly benefit from the underpayments and thus found that
this factor favored granting relief to petitioner. However, at
trial, respondent argued that petitioner’s obtaining an
associate’s degree was a significant benefit. During the period
from 1992 to 1998, petitioner did obtain an associate’s degree.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011