- 8 -
the payment of tax when she signed the 2000 tax return,
petitioners submitted a handwritten statement from her as
follows:
At the time I signed the 2000 tax return, it was
my understanding that my husband would take care of
paying the taxes since the increase in our taxes was
the result of employee stock options occurring in his
separate stock account. I did not receive any
brokerage statements for this account and did not know
the amount of funds in this account. Ever since we’ve
been married, my husband has always taken care of all
our tax filings and at the time I signed the 2000 tax
return, I had no reason to believe otherwise.
The transmittal letter by Mrs. Chou’s counsel noted that the
knowledge factor “is just one of several factors to be considered
and is not a conclusive factor.”
The section 6015(f) claim, in accordance with IRS procedure,
was sent to a centralized unit in Cincinnati, Ohio. The file
relating to the section 6015(f) claim was then transmitted from
Cincinnati to Oakland, California, but was lost in transit. In
order to consider Mrs. Chou’s claim, Dorr recreated the file
relating to that claim. In recreating the file, Dorr failed to
maintain a complete case activity record and did not prepare any
document supporting his determination with respect to Mrs. Chou’s
section 6015(f) claim. The file that has been stipulated as the
“administrative record” in this case omitted at least four other
items that should have been included in the administrative
record. Those items are: (1) A true and complete copy of the
Notice of Intent to Levy dated November 10, 2003, and the Letter
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007