Eleanor Simon - Page 33

                                       - 33 -                                         
          the instant case.                                                           
               With respect to the legal obligation negative factor set               
          forth in section 4.03(2)(f) of Revenue Procedure 2000-15, we have           
          found that, because petitioner concedes that Mr. Simon does not             
          have a legal obligation to pay any tax due for 1998, petitioner             
          concedes that the legal obligation positive factor set forth in             
          section 4.03(1)(e) of that revenue procedure is not present in              
          the instant case.  We have also found that there is no separate             
          legal obligation, such as a divorce decree or a property settle-            
          ment, that requires petitioner to pay any such tax due.13  On the           
          record before us, we find that the legal obligation negative                
          factor is not present in the instant case.                                  
               On the record before us, we find that petitioner has failed            
          to carry her burden of establishing any other factors that weigh            
          in favor of granting relief under section 6015(f) and that are              
          not set forth in sections 4.02(1) and 4.03(1) of Revenue Proce-             
          dure 2000-15.                                                               
               Based upon our examination of the entire record before us,             
          we find that petitioner has failed to carry her burden of showing           
          that respondent abused respondent’s discretion in denying her               
          relief under section 6015(f) with respect to the unpaid 1998                
          liability.                                                                  


               13Division of the marital assets of petitioner and Mr. Simon           
          remains to be adjudicated by the North Carolina courts.                     





Page:  Previous  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011