Tracy L. Geaccone - Page 8




                                       - 7 -                                          
             then, for purposes of this title, such item of community                 
        income shall be included in the gross income of the other                     
        spouse (and not in the gross income of the individual). * * *                 
                                                                                     
        Section 66(c) pertains to items of community income, and that                 
        is one component of respondent’s calculations that led to his                 
        determination that petitioner is liable for a deficiency in income            
        tax for 2001.  According to respondent, the amount of income,                 
        including community income, that petitioner should have reported              
        in her 2001 return was $215,647.66.  Petitioner reported gross                
        income of $165,463.20, which is $50,184.46 less than respondent               
        determined, giving rise to a deficiency in tax of $5,921.                     
        Petitioner may be relieved of liability for the tax associated                
        with this community income if she meets all four of the criteria              
        of section 66(c).  We find that she does not.                                 
             The parties agree that petitioner meets the first and second             
        conditions of section 66(c).  Respondent contends that petitioner             
        does not satisfy the third condition, which relates to                        
        petitioner’s knowledge of the community income.  Petitioner                   
        contends that she did not have access to Dr. Geaccone’s books and             
        records, which would have shown the amount of his earnings, and               
        therefore she had no knowledge of his earnings as an item of                  
        community property.  Petitioner testified that her divorce was not            
        amicable and that by the time she filed her 2001 tax return in                
        2002, her relationship with Dr. Geaccone had deteriorated to the              
        point that they were no longer in direct communication.                       







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

Last modified: November 10, 2007