- 14 -
activities and that she had no reason to know their 1998 and 1999
reported tax liabilities would be unpaid.6
Prior to signing and filing the 1998 and 1999 tax returns,
petitioner’s wages were garnished by respondent to pay
petitioner’s and Mr. Crouch’s joint 1997 tax liability. At the
least, this put petitioner on notice of the tax problems she and
Mr. Crouch were facing. Even more detrimental to her argument,
petitioner testified that she knew they could not pay the amount
due when she signed the returns. We find petitioner knew or had
reason to know that the reported liability would be unpaid at the
time she signed the returns. This factor weighs against relief.
7. Whether the Underpayment of Tax Is Attributable to the
Non-Requesting Spouse
Respondent concedes that the underpayment of tax was solely
attributable to Mr. Crouch’s business activities. This factor
favors relief.
8. Legal Obligation To Pay
Because there is no decree or agreement imposing such
obligation, this factor is neutral.
The only factor favoring relief is that the underpayment of
tax was attributable to Mr. Crouch. This factor is strongly
6 In support of her argument, petitioner cites Browda v.
Commissioner, T.C. Summary Opinion 2004-16. Under sec. 7463(b),
summary opinions are not treated as precedent for any other case,
and we do not consider further petitioner’s argument as it
relates to Browda.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007