- 6 -
Cheshire v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 183, 195 (2000)). “In the
case of omitted income * * *, the electing spouse must have an
actual and clear awareness of the omitted income.” Id.
Respondent agrees that petitioner is entitled to relief
under section 6015(c). Intervenor filed her notice of
intervention for the purpose of opposing petitioner’s claim for
relief under section 6015. If intervenor offers sufficient
evidence that petitioner had “actual knowledge” of the early
retirement distribution, then petitioner should not be entitled
to relief under section 6015(c).
Intervenor’s testimony that petitioner had actual knowledge
about the early retirement distribution is not corroborated by
other testimony or evidence. The record demonstrates that
intervenor had sole control over the GM 401(k) account and
petitioner had no access to the statements for their joint bank
account. The record contains no facts which show error in
respondent’s position, and the Court concludes that petitioner
did not have actual knowledge of the factual circumstances
regarding the distribution and that petitioner is entitled to
relief from joint and several liability under section 6015(c).
Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case
Division.
Decision will be entered
for petitioner.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Last modified: May 25, 2011