- 12 -
2001, and that she is a skilled professional. Nothing in the
record indicates that she is no longer employed at a salary similar
to her 2001 salary. On this record, we do not find that petitioner
would suffer economic hardship if relief is not granted. This
factor weighs against petitioner.
(c) Knowledge or reason to know. In the case of an income tax
liability that arose from a deficiency, whether the requesting
spouse did not know and had no reason to know of the item giving
rise to the deficiency. As discussed supra, we find that
petitioner knew or had reason to know of the community income which
gave rise to the understatement of her income and resulted in the
deficiency respondent determined. This factor weighs against
petitioner.
(d) Nonrequesting spouse’s legal obligation. Whether the
nonrequesting spouse has a legal obligation to pay the outstanding
income tax liability pursuant to a divorce decree or agreement.
Petitioner’s divorce decree assigns her responsibility for all
income taxes “associated with the federal income tax return filed
by petitioner individually for the calendar year 2001.”
Correspondingly, the divorce decree assigns to Dr. Geaccone
responsibility for all Federal income taxes “associated with * * *
[Dr. Geaccone’s] earnings in his dental practice for the calendar
year 2001.” This factor weighs in favor of petitioner.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007