- 40 -
This Court has consistently applied the principle that the
provisions providing relief from joint and several liability are
“‘designed to protect the innocent, not the intentionally
ignorant’”. Morello v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-181
(quoting Dickey v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1985-478). In
petitioner’s case, the joint returns for taxable years 1998,
1999, and 2000 each showed a balance due on the line stating
“AMOUNT YOU OWE”. Petitioner was aware of the financial
difficulties facing her family at the respective times she signed
these returns, yet she did not even look at each return to
determine whether she and Mr. Barrera owed tax or were due a
refund of overpaid tax. Under the circumstances of this case, we
cannot find that petitioner had no reason to know that Mr.
Barrera would not pay the balances shown as owing. At a minimum,
petitioner did not meet her well-established duty of inquiry with
respect to payment of those balances.
On the record before us, we conclude that petitioner has not
established that she did not know, nor did she have reason to
know, that the liabilities reported on the joint returns for
taxable years 1998, 1999, and 2000 would not be paid at the
respective times she signed returns. This factor weighs against
relief.
Page: Previous 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007