- 10 -
spouse knew or had reason to know that the reported liability
would be unpaid at the time of signing; (3) the requesting spouse
benefited significantly from the unpaid liability; (4) the
requesting spouse will not experience economic hardship if relief
is not granted; (5) the requesting spouse had not made a good
faith attempt to comply with the tax laws in subsequent years;
and (6) the requesting spouse has a legal obligation to pay the
deficiency. Rev. Proc. 2000-15, sec. 4.03, makes clear that no
single factor is determinative. The Court considers the
aforementioned factors in determining whether there is an abuse
of discretion by respondent in denying equitable relief under
section 6015(f) for the underpayments.
For a taxpayer who seeks relief from an underpayment of
income tax due, Rev. Proc. 2000-15, 2000-1 C.B. at 449, questions
whether the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know that the
income tax liability would not be paid at the time of filing. A
spouse requesting relief under section 6015 has a duty of
inquiry. Butler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. at 284. Petitioner
admitted he was aware that the reported tax liability for 2001
would not be paid at the time the return was filed because the
combination of the divorce settlement agreement and Ms. Peet’s
illicit actions rendered him unable to pay the tax due at the
time of filing. At trial, respondent asserted that petitioner
should have known that the tax liability for 2000 would not be
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011