Thomas A. Schroeder - Page 5




                                        - 4 -                                         
          Commissioner, 98 T.C. 383 (1992).  Petitioner was a partner in              
          the partnership that was the source of the unreported income in             
          issue.                                                                      
               Therefore, the Court has no basis for limiting petitioner’s            
          liability to 50 percent as he requests.  Petitioner does not                
          qualify for section 6015 relief, because he admits to receiving             
          and failing to report the items of income.  Petitioner does not             
          qualify for relief under section 6015(b), because he cannot                 
          establish that he did not know or had no reason to know that                
          there was an understatement of tax when he signed the return.               
          See sec. 6015(b)(1) and (2).  Petitioner testified that he was              
          unaware of the understatement on the return because he did not              
          receive the form for 2003 reporting distributions from the                  
          partnership and he relied on his accountant to prepare the                  
          return.  In view of his long-held interest in the partnership,              
          however, he should have known that his income from the                      
          partnership was not included on the return and that an                      
          understatement would result.  Because the items giving rise to              
          the deficiency were directly allocable to petitioner, section               
          6015(c) does not provide any avenue for relief.  See also sec.              
          1.6015-3(d)(2)(iii), Income Tax Regs. (stating that erroneous               
          items of income are allocated to the spouse who was the source of           
          the income).  Finally, it is not inequitable to hold petitioner             
          liable for the deficiency since he fails one of the threshold               







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: March 27, 2008