- 7 -
base amount despite being able to exclude her spouse’s income
from AGI. Application of this theory would cause inconsistent
results. Rather, we conclude section 86 provides a greater
adjusted base amount in the case of a joint return because tax is
computed on the married individuals’ aggregate income. See sec.
6013(d)(3); see also Anderson v. Commissioner, 77 T.C. 1271, 1272
(1981) (holding that the phrase “every person” in section 56(a)
(as in effect for 1976) “refers to all persons (singularly or
plural)”); Boehm v. Commissioner, supra.
We conclude that in the case of a joint return, modified
adjusted gross income under section 86 includes the income of
each spouse. Respondent’s determination is therefore sustained.
2. Estoppel
Petitioner has received Social Security benefits for a
number of years. Petitioners contend that on their joint 2000,
2001, and 2002 returns they did not report the Social Security
benefits as income. Petitioners further contend that respondent
examined those returns but eventually determined that the
benefits were not taxable. Petitioners therefore believe that
respondent should be estopped from including the benefits in
their gross income for subsequent years.
Equitable estoppel is a judicial doctrine that precludes a
party from denying his own acts or representations that induced
another to act to his detriment. Hofstetter v. Commissioner, 98
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011