- 13 - residence with encumbrances totaling $408,000. But petitioner’s mortgage statements show that her principal residence is encumbered only to the extent of $387,811.39, giving her potential equity of $22,188.61. At trial, petitioner testified that a silent third party, her parents, gave her the money to acquire the second home to “share in the equity”, so they encumbered the residence to the extent of $22,000. But petitioner also testified that title to the property was held in her name only, and she failed to offer any evidence proving her parents’ interest, other than her self- serving testimony. Petitioner also did not offer any evidence of the properties’ current values to support her valuations. Substantiation of her parents’ interest and the properties’ values is crucial in view of the $22,188.61 in potential equity.4 Additionally, it is difficult to find that the economic hardship factor weighs in favor of relief in view of the fact that petitioner used moneys received after her divorce to acquire items with her second husband (i.e., new cars/second home) rather than satisfying her Federal tax liabilities. The Court is also disturbed by the fact that petitioner has not sought repayment from Mr. Nakasu for his alleged misappropriation of the proceeds received from the sale of their marital home. 4 Although the rental property is currently rented with a negative cashflow, there exists the possibility that the property can be rented for profit or sold at a gain.Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: March 27, 2008