- 16 -
proposed regulations were published explaining the allocation
systems “petitioner did not even know whether * * * it would be
worth the effort (not to mention this Court’s resources), to seek
relief”; and (4) because of the 2-year election rule under
section 6015 as enacted by the 1998 Act, petitioner was not
required to seek relief under section 6015 while the 1989 case
was pending.
Respondent notes that the effective date of the regulation
on which petitioner relies precludes its application to
petitioner’s case,6 but agrees that “the reasoning behind Treas.
Reg. § 1.6015-1(e), that a taxpayer should not be barred from
raising section 6015 if the defense was unavailable because of
the effective date of section 6015, should apply with equal force
here.”7 Respondent contends that petitioner’s motion should
nevertheless be denied because the section 6015 innocent spouse
defense was available to petitioner in the 1989 case, based on
the following: (1) Reopening the record is within the discretion
5(...continued)
new issue to be raised during the Rule 155 computation
proceedings.
6 The parties stipulated that petitioner filed her request
for innocent spouse relief on Nov. 21, 2001. The regulations
apply to requests filed on or after July 18, 2002. Sec. 1.6015-
9, Income Tax Regs.
7 To the same effect, see our discussion in Trent v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-285. See also Hopkins v.
Commissioner, 120 T.C. 451 (2003).
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007