David Bruce Billings - Page 7




                                        - 7 -                                         
          6015(f) petitions--to have had a deficiency asserted against                
          them.  But Congress amended section 6015(e) after we released               
          Billings I to insert “or in the case of an individual who                   
          requests equitable relief under section 6015(f)” into section               
          6015(e).  The Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 (TRHCA),               
          Pub. L. 109-432, div. C, sec. 408(a), 120 Stat. 2922, 3061.  The            
          opening line of section 6015(e) now reads:                                  
               SEC. 6015(e).  Petition for Review by Tax Court.                       
                         (1) In general.--In the case of an                           
                    individual against whom a deficiency has been                     
                    asserted and who elects to have subsection                        
                    (b) or (c) apply, or in the case of an                            
                    individual who requests equitable relief                          
                    under subsection (f)--                                            
               The amendment is effective for liabilities remaining unpaid            
          on December 20, 2006.  TRHCA sec. 408(c), 120 Stat. 3062.  No               
          suspense here:  The parties’ stipulation that David’s 1999 tax              
          liability remains unpaid assures us that we do have jurisdiction            
          to review the Commissioner’s decision to deny him relief.                   
               We are mindful that our review of that decision is for abuse           
          of discretion.  See Butler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 276, 287-92            
          (2000).  This standard does not ask us to decide whether in our             
          own opinion we should grant relief, but whether the Commissioner,           
          in refusing to do so, exercised his discretion “arbitrarily,                
          capriciously, or without sound basis in fact.”  Jonson v.                   
          Commissioner, 118 T.C. 106, 125 (2002), affd. 353 F.3d 1181 (10th           
          Cir. 2003).  When deciding whether to grant 6015(f) relief, the             






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007