- 10 -
In this case, petitioner divorced intervenor in 2000;
therefore, he satisfies the first factor. With respect
to the second factor, petitioner must show that he would be
unable to pay basic reasonable living expenses if relief were not
granted. See Monsour v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-190.
Being unable to pay basic reasonable living expenses would amount
to economic hardship. Sec. 301.6343-1(b)(4)(i), Proced. & Admin.
Regs. Petitioner has not alleged that denial of his request for
relief would result in economic hardship. He is gainfully
employed and has no dependents. The Court fails to
see, and petitioner has neither raised as an issue or
established, that he would suffer economic hardship if his
request for relief from joint liability were denied.
As to the third factor, as discussed earlier, petitioner had
actual knowledge of the pension income when he completed the 1999
income tax return. Rev. Proc. 2003-61, sec. 4.03 specifically
states that actual knowledge by the requesting spouse of the item
giving rise to the deficiency is a strong factor weighing against
relief. This strong factor may be overcome only if the factors
in favor of equitable relief are particularly compelling. We
conclude that they are not.
As to the fourth factor, petitioner points to language in
the separation agreement which states that if a deficiency
“results from the unreported income of one spouse, then the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011