- 19 - settlement of property rights of the parties. However, petitioner has not provided respondent’s counsel or this Court with a copy of the aforesaid agreement. Rev. Proc. 2000-15, sec. 4.03(1)(e), indicates that if Mr. Glaze had a legal obligation under the judgment for dissolution of marriage to pay the tax liabilities, then that fact would weigh in favor of granting relief to petitioner. Likewise, if the judgment for dissolution of marriage had placed the obligation to pay the taxes on petitioner, then that fact would weigh against granting relief to her as indicated in Rev. Proc. 2000-15, sec. 4.03(2)(f). In the present case, the divorce decree has not been offered into evidence. Thus, this is a neutral factor. 6. Attributable to Nonrequesting Spouse As previously stated, $36,400 of petitioner’s and Mr. Glaze’s unreported income for taxable year 1995 is attributable to wages earned through Mr. Glaze’s employment with Mayflower. The additional $24 of interest income was received by petitioner and Mr. Glaze in both their names and is therefore attributable to both petitioner and Mr. Glaze. As to the $36,400 of petitioner’s and Mr. Glaze’s unreported income for taxable year 1995, this factor favors granting petitioner equitable relief.Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011