David Bruce Billings - Page 33

                                       - 33 -                                         
               I agree with the Court Opinion that in the instant case                
          there would be no “deficiency” extant after petitioner and his              
          spouse filed their joint amended return if the meaning of that              
          term in section 301.6211-1(a), Proced. & Admin. Regs., were                 
          applicable for purposes of section 6015.11  However, the Court              
          Opinion does not consider, let alone answer, whether and why that           
          meaning, and not the meaning established in cases such as                   
          Badaracco v. Commissioner, supra, should apply for purposes of              
          section 6015, including section 6015(e)(1).12  The term                     
          “deficiency” that appears in section 6015(e)(1) in the phrase               

               11That there would be no “deficiency” extant after                     
          petitioner and his spouse filed their joint amended return if the           
          definition of that term in sec. 301.6211-1(a), Proced. & Admin.             
          Regs., were applicable for purposes of sec. 6015 does not answer            
          the question whether “a deficiency has been asserted” for                   
          purposes of sec. 6015(e)(1).  See discussion below.  Nor does it            
          answer the question whether there is (1) a “deficiency”, or an              
          “understatement of tax”, for purposes of sec. 6015(b) or (2) a              
          “deficiency” for purposes of sec. 6015(c).  Sec. 6015(b)(1)(B)              
          requires that there be an “understatement of tax” in the return             
          in order to obtain relief under sec. 6015(b).  Sec. 6015(b)(1)(D)           
          refers to whether it is inequitable to hold the taxpayer liable             
          “for the deficiency in tax for such taxable year attributable to            
          such understatement”.  Sec. 6015(b)(3) provides that the term               
          “understatement” is defined by sec. 6662(d)(2)(A).  Sec.                    
          6662(d)(2)(A) generally defines that term as the excess of “the             
          amount of the tax required to be shown on the return” over “the             
          amount of the tax * * * shown on the return”.  Nothing in sec.              
          6015(b) requires that “a deficiency has been asserted”.                     
               12The Court Opinion’s ipse dixit that, for all purposes of             
          the Code, the only meaning of the term “deficiency” is that set             
          forth in sec. 301.6211-1(a), Proced. & Admin. Regs., not only               
          ignores caselaw holding to the contrary, it also disregards that            
          nothing in sec. 6015 requires a “deficiency” (or “understatement            
          of tax”) to continue to exist at any time after a taxpayer files            
          an original return.                                                         




Page:  Previous  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011