Victoria K.M. Freulich - Page 7




                                        - 6 -                                         
              Relief Under Section 6015(c)                                            
              Section 6015(c) allows proportionate tax relief (if a timely            
         election is made) through allocation of the deficiency between               
         individuals who filed a joint return and are no longer married,              
         are legally separated, or have been living apart for a 12-month              
         period.                                                                      
              Petitioner’s husband passed away before she received the                
         statutory notice of deficiency and filed her election for relief             
         under section 6015.  A widow or widower is treated as a taxpayer             
         who is no longer married.  See Jonson v. Commissioner, 118 T.C.              
         106, 124 (2002), affd. 353 F.3d 1181 (10th Cir. 2003).                       
         Therefore, petitioner is eligible to elect the application of                
         section 6015(c).                                                             
              Relief under section 6015(c), however, is not available if              
         respondent demonstrates that the requesting spouse had actual                
         knowledge, at the time the return was signed, of any item giving             
         rise to a deficiency (or portion thereof) that is not allocable              
         to such individual.  Sec. 6015(c)(3)(C); Hopkins v. Commissioner,            
         121 T.C. 73, 86 (2003); Cheshire v. Commissioner, supra at 193-              
         194.  The knowledge requirement under section 6015(c)(3)(C) does             
         not require the requesting spouse to possess actual knowledge of             
         the tax consequences arising from the item giving rise to the                
         deficiency.  Hopkins v. Commissioner, supra at 86; Cheshire v.               
         Commissioner, supra at 194; sec. 1.6015-3(c)(2), Income Tax Regs.            







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007