Luis A. Vasquez, Petitioner, and Wendy Houdeshell, n.k.a. Wendy Gray, Intervenor - Page 6

                                        - 5 -                                         
          manner as it would have been allocated if the individual had                
          filed a separate return for the taxable year.                               
               A taxpayer is eligible to elect the application of section             
          6015(c) if, at the time the election is filed, the taxpayer is no           
          longer married to or is legally separated from the individual               
          with whom the taxpayer filed the joint return to which the                  
          election relates.  Sec. 6015(c)(3)(A)(i)(I).  The election under            
          section 6015(c) may be made at any time after a deficiency for              
          such year is asserted and no later than 2 years after the date on           
          which the Commissioner has begun collection activities with                 
          respect to the taxpayer making the election.  Sec. 6015(c)(3)(B).           
          Petitioner and intervenor were divorced on December 9, 2002, and            
          petitioner’s election was made soon after his receipt of the                
          notice of deficiency.  Therefore, petitioner is eligible to elect           
          the application of section 6015(c) to limit his liability for the           
          2001 tax deficiency.                                                        
               Relief under section 6015(c) is not available to petitioner            
          if respondent demonstrates that petitioner had actual knowledge             
          of the item giving rise to the deficiency.  Sec. 6015(c)(3)(C);             
          King v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 198, 203 (2001).  The “‘knowledge            
          standard’” for purposes of section 6015(c)(3)(C) “‘is an actual             
          and clear awareness (as opposed to reason to know) of the                   
          existence of an item which gives rise to the deficiency (or                 
          portion thereof).’”  King v. Commissioner, supra at 203 (quoting            






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011