Homer L. Richardson - Page 64

                                       - 64 -                                         
                         reason to know, that there was such                          
                         understatement;                                              
                              (D) taking into account all the facts                   
                         and circumstances, it is inequitable to hold                 
                         the other individual liable for the                          
                         deficiency in tax for such taxable year                      
                         attributable to such understatement; and                     
                              (E) the other individual elects (in such                
                         form as the Secretary may prescribe) the                     
                         benefits of this subsection not later than                   
                         the date which is 2 years after the date the                 
                         Secretary has begun collection activities                    
                         with respect to the individual making the                    
                         election,                                                    
                    then the other individual shall be relieved of                    
                    liability for tax (including interest, penalties,                 
                    and other amounts) for such taxable year to the                   
                    extent such liability is attributable to such                     
                    understatement.                                                   
          The burden rests on Mrs. Richardson to establish that she has met           
          each of five elements enumerated above.  Alt v. Commissioner, 119           
          T.C. 306, 311 (2002), affd. 101 Fed. Appx. 34 (6th Cir. 2004).              
          Respondent has conceded that the first and fifth requirements are           
          satisfied; thus, the second, third, and fourth requirements                 
          remain in dispute.                                                          
               At the outset, we highlight a few difficulties created by              
          the state of the record on this issue.  Mrs. Richardson did not             
          testify at trial, so the Court has had no opportunity to assess             
          her demeanor and credibility, nor has respondent had a chance to            
          solicit information on cross-examination.  In fact, there is a              
          notable dearth of evidence directed specifically to this issue.             
          What data can be gleaned about Mrs. Richardson’s involvement in             





Page:  Previous  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011