- 6 -
The Commissioner then revisited Ms. Goode-Parker’s case to
decide it on the merits, but again rejected it. He denied relief
under section 6015(b) and (c) because he found that she had
reason to know of the items causing the understatement of tax.
And he also denied relief under section 6015(f) because he found
that she did not reasonably believe, when she signed the return,
that the tax would be paid in a reasonable amount of time;
because she did not establish that paying the tax would cause her
economic hardship; and because a portion of the unpaid tax was
attributable to her.
Ms. Goode-Parker seeks review of this revised determination.
Trial was held in Los Angeles, and she resided in California when
she filed her petition.
Discussion
This is one of a large number of cases affected first by the
Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Commissioner v. Ewing, 439 F.3d 1009
(9th Cir. 2006), revg. 118 T.C. 494 (2002), vacating 122 T.C. 32
(2004), and then by this Court’s opinion in Billings v.
Commissioner, 127 T.C. 7 (2006). These cases both held that the
Tax Court’s jurisdiction to review the Commissioner’s innocent
spouse determinations requires that a deficiency have been
asserted against the taxpayer seeking relief. To understand what
this means requires a little background: Section 6013(a) lets
married couples choose to file their Federal tax return jointly,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011