- 10 -
Upon the basis of the facts of the present case, we find
that petitioner was well aware of the income received by Mr.
Glaze from Mayflower for his services, and that such income was
not reported as gross income on their 1995 joint Federal income
tax return. Therefore, we conclude that petitioner may not claim
that she did not have knowledge of the income received by Mr.
Glaze.
Further, petitioner had actual knowledge of the interest
income received from the U.S. Treasury of $24, because such
income was jointly received in the names of both petitioner and
Mr. Glaze. Accordingly, we hold that petitioner is not entitled
to relief under section 6015(b).
B. Section 6015(c)
Section 6015(c) grants relief from joint and several tax
liability for electing individuals who filed a joint return and
are no longer married, are legally separated, or are living
apart. Generally, this type of relief treats spouses, for
purposes of determining tax liability, as if separate returns had
been filed. Sec. 6015(d)(3)(A); Grossman v. Commissioner, 182
F.3d 275, 278 (4th Cir. 1999), affg. T.C. Memo. 1996-452;
Charlton v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 333, 342 (2000); Rowe v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-325. The allocation, however, is
not permitted if the Secretary shows by a preponderance of the
evidence that the electing individual had “actual knowledge, at
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