- 35 -
have accrued. On an attachment to the Form 8857 she
argued that the following three point support here
position:
1. She did not sign the joint return;
2. She did not have any income during 1998; and
3. She had no knowledge of what was shown on the
1998 return.
Compliance concluded, after consideration of all the
facts and circumstances, it would not be inequitable to
hold Janet liable for the underpayment and additions
thereto because:
• Janet knew that there was an underpayment at
the time she signed the return; and
• She did not establish that she had a reason-
able belief that the taxes would be paid by
the nonrequesting spouse.
Key facts on which Compliance based its conclusion are:
Janet and Paul were living together as hus-
band and wife at the time the return was
signed and at the time the return was filed;
Janet has a college education;
The couple maintained a joint checking ac-
count during 1998 and 1999.
Compliance also determined that Janet did have taxable
income during 1998 and that she did in fact sign the
return.
Janet filed a written Protest on November 1, 2001.
* * *
Dermot Kennedy, Janet’s representative, filed a Supple-
mental Protest on November 7, 2003. In this supplement
he discusses IRC 6015(b) and 6015(c). Relief is not
available to Janet under either of these sections
because the unpaid liability is not an understatement,
but rather an underpayment. I will not address any of
the points Mr. Kennedy raised relative to these two
sections.
Page: Previous 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011