- 15 -
Douglas v. Commissioner, 27 T.C. 306, 313-314 (1956), affd. sub
nom. Sullivan v. Commissioner, 256 F.2d 4 (5th Cir. 1958); Heim
v. Commissioner, 27 T.C. 270, 273 (1956), affd. 251 F.2d 44 (8th
Cir. 1958). Whether a husband and a wife intended to file a
joint return is highly probative of whether the return qualifies
as a joint return. Stone v. Commissioner, 22 T.C. 893, 900-901
(1954). A spouse’s intent is a question of fact. Estate of
Campbell v. Commissioner, supra at 12.
Despite petitioner’s claim that Mr. Magee forged her
signature on their joint return,13 the Court construes
petitioner’s testimony and statement as affirming that she
intended to file a joint return with Mr. Magee for 1996.
Petitioner testified that she filed a separate return for 1996.
In reality, petitioner belatedly filed as an attachment to her
Form 843 a Form 1040-SS,14 dated March 15, 2004, for her 1996
taxable year showing negative self-employment income in the
amount of $435 and no tax due. However, petitioner’s previously
13 Petitioner was in the process of introducing evidence
that the signature on the 1996 joint return was not her signature
when respondent agreed verbally to stipulate this fact.
Petitioner did not introduce any credible evidence that her
agreement to file a joint Federal income tax return was acquired
under duress.
14 See supra notes 3 and 4. It appears that in 1996,
petitioner intended to file a joint return with Mr. Magee.
However, in 1998, after Mr. Magee failed to pay child support
payments, petitioner apparently questioned her decision to file
jointly with him. In 2004, after the IRS initiated collection
action, petitioner attempted to file a separate return for 1996
to avoid liability for the unpaid 1996 joint tax still due and to
obtain a refund of her $900 in tax credits.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011