- 21 -
LARO, J., concurring: The Court today appropriately
overrules the opinion of the Court in Ewing v. Commissioner,
118 T.C. 494 (2002), revd. Commissioner v. Ewing, 439 F.3d 1009
(9th Cir. 2006). With that result, I concur.1 As I stated in my
dissent in Ewing v. Commissioner, supra at 510, the Court’s
opinion there, while reaching a practical result, disregarded the
obvious plain reading of section 6015(e)(1).2 In accordance with
such a plain reading, Congress has allowed the Court to review an
individual’s petition seeking equitable relief under section
6015(f) (equitable relief) only when: (1) The Commissioner has
1 I disagree with the lead opinion in this case in that it
sets forth dicta regarding jurisdiction in situations not before
the Court in this case.
2 Sec. 6015(e)(1) empowers the Court to review a taxpayer’s
stand-alone petition challenging the Commissioner’s determination
as to the taxpayer’s administrative claim for relief from joint
liability under sec. 6015. See generally Fernandez v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 324, 329 (2000) (coining the phrase
“stand-alone petition” to refer to a petition filed to invoke our
jurisdiction under sec. 6015(e)(1)). Sec. 6015(e)(1) provides in
relevant part:
SEC. 6015(e).
(1) In general.--In the case of an individual
against whom a deficiency has been asserted and who
elects to have subsection (b) or (c) apply–
(A) In general.--In addition to any
other remedy provided by law, the individual
may petition the Tax Court (and the Tax Court
shall have jurisdiction) to determine the
appropriate relief available to the
individual under this section if such
petition is filed * * * [timely.]
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011