- 23 -
(1) taking into account all the facts and
circumstances, it is inequitable to hold the indi-
vidual liable for any unpaid tax or any deficiency
(or any portion of either); and
(2) relief is not available to such indi-
vidual under subsection (b) or (c),
the Secretary may relieve such individual of such
liability.
To prevail under section 6015(f), petitioner must show that
respondent's denial of equitable relief under that section was an
abuse of discretion. See Washington v. Commissioner, 120 T.C. at
146; Jonson v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 106, 125 (2002) (citing
Butler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. at 292), affd. 353 F.3d 1181
(10th Cir. 2003). Respondent’s denial of such relief will
constitute an abuse of discretion where it was arbitrary, capri-
cious, or without sound basis in fact or law. Woodral v. Commis-
sioner, 112 T.C. 19, 23 (1999). The question whether respon-
dent's denial of relief under section 6015(f) was arbitrary,
capricious, or without sound basis in fact is a question of fact.
Cheshire v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 183, 197-198 (2000), affd. 282
F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2002). In deciding whether respondent's
denial of relief under section 6015(f) was an abuse of discre-
tion, we consider evidence relating to all the facts and circum-
stances.
As directed by section 6015(f), the Commissioner has pre-
scribed guidelines in Revenue Procedure 2000-15 to be considered
in determining whether an individual qualifies for relief under
Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007