- 16 -
directly into petitioner’s personal account, and the remainder
was deposited into their joint bank account. In addition, the
exaggeration of Mr. Clark’s moving expenses, unreimbursed
employee expenses, and Schedule C losses reduced petitioner’s tax
liability on the joint returns. Finally, petitioner’s greatest
benefit was the quitclaim deed Mr. Clark executed in 1999, which
gave all of his interest in their home solely to petitioner. The
house was purchased in 1998, presumably with the income of both
petitioner and Mr. Clark and with income that Mr. Clark failed to
report. As previously noted, petitioner sold that home, received
all proceeds from the sale, and later used them to purchase a
condominium.
The failure of petitioner to satisfy all but one of the
factors in Rev. Proc. 2003-61, supra, is determinative. After
considering all the facts and circumstances, the Court holds that
there was no abuse of discretion by respondent in denying relief
to petitioner under section 6015(f). The Court, therefore,
sustains that denial.
Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case
Division.
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Last modified: May 25, 2011