- 30 - except for her weight, she was in good health during the 1997 and 1999 years at issue and until 2000 when her blood pressure began rising. The Court observes that petitioner was able to work multiple jobs throughout much of the relevant period. Thus, while the Court does not doubt that petitioner bore substantial stress on account of the difficult circumstances besetting her family, the record does not enable us to find particular health issues of a nature that would affect the balancing of her claim for relief. This factor, too, is neutral. Accordingly, of those factors identified in the pertinent revenue procedure, only one weighs clearly in favor of granting relief. The remainder are either negative or essentially neutral. The Court is therefore unable to conclude that respondent’s denial of equitable relief under section 6015(f) was an abuse of discretion. The Court has considered all other arguments made by the parties and, to the extent not specifically addressed herein, has concluded that they are without merit or are moot. To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered for respondent.Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30Last modified: November 10, 2007