Connie J. Meadows - Page 5

                                       - 4 -                                          
        jointly and severally liable for the taxes due thereon.  Sec.                 
        6013(d)(3).  Section 6015 provides relief from liability for                  
        filers of joint returns in some circumstances.  Under section                 
        6015(b), a spouse may seek relief for understatements of tax                  
        attributable to certain erroneous items on a return.  Under                   
        section 6015(c), the tax liability may be apportioned between two             
        former or separated spouses.  These provisions apply when there is            
        a deficiency in tax.  Petitioner was successful in obtaining                  
        relief under section 6015(c) for the deficiency respondent                    
        determined.                                                                   
             In cases of underpayment, section 6015(f) applies.  Section              
        6015(f) provides, in part, that a taxpayer may be relieved from               
        joint and several liability if it is determined that, taking into             
        account all the facts and circumstances, it is inequitable to hold            
        the taxpayer liable for the unpaid tax, and relief is not                     
        available under section 6015(b) or (c).  If relief is denied, then            
        to prevail the taxpayer must prove that the Commissioner’s denial             
        of equitable relief from joint liability under section 6015(f) was            
        an abuse of discretion.  Butler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 276,                
        287-292 (2000).  The Court defers to the Commissioner’s                       
        determination unless it is arbitrary, capricious, or without sound            
        basis in fact.  Jonson v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 106, 125 (2002),             
        affd. 353 F.3d 1181 (10th Cir. 2003).  Whether the Commissioner’s             
        determination was an abuse of discretion is a question of fact.               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011