- 6 -
the joint returns as part of a fraudulent scheme by such spouses;
(6) there were no disqualified assets transferred to the taxpayer
by the nonrequesting spouse; and (7) the taxpayer did not file
the returns with fraudulent intent. Rev. Proc. 2000-15, sec.
4.01, 2000-1 C.B. at 448. Respondent concedes that petitioner
meets these conditions.
Rev. Proc. 2000-15, sec. 4.03, lists two factors which, if
true, the Commissioner treats only as favoring relief: (1) The
taxpayer is separated or divorced from the nonrequesting spouse;
and (2) the taxpayer was abused by the nonrequesting spouse.
Rev. Proc. 2000-15, sec. 4.03, also lists two factors which, if
true, the Commissioner treats only as not favoring relief: (3)
The taxpayer received significant benefit from the unpaid
liability or the item giving rise to the deficiency; and (4) the
taxpayer has not made a good faith effort to comply with Federal
income tax laws in the tax years following the tax year to which
the request for relief relates. See Ferrarese v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2002-249.
The Commissioner generally does not consider the absence of
factor (1), (2), (3), or (4) in determining whether to grant
relief under section 6015(f). Rev. Proc. 2000-15, sec. 4.03.
However, on the basis of caselaw deciding whether it was
equitable to relieve a taxpayer from joint liability under former
section 6013(e)(1)(D), we consider the fact that a taxpayer did
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007