- 17 -
Respondent represents that there is significant benefit
beyond normal support due to the unpaid tax liabilities; i.e.,
the failure to pay the tax “resulted in significant additional
income.”
The significant benefit factor probes whether the requesting
spouse received, directly or indirectly, from the assets or
income resulting from the unpaid tax liability any benefit in
excess of normal support. Sec. 1.6015-2(d), Income Tax Regs.;
Rev. Proc. 2003-61, sec. 4.03(2)(a)(v), 2003-2 C.B. at 299
(citing section 1.6015-2(d), Income Tax Regs.). In determining
whether the requesting spouse significantly benefited from the
unpaid tax liabilities, the Court considers whether the
requesting and nonrequesting spouses were able to make
expenditures that they would not have been able to make
otherwise. See Levy v. Commissioner, supra (and cases cited
therein). Additionally, evidence of a significant benefit “may
consist of transfers of property or rights to property, including
transfers that may be received several years” later. Sec.
1.6015-2(d), Income Tax Regs.
There is nothing in the record regarding petitioner’s and
Mr. Nakasu’s lifestyle or spending habits during their marriage
or any other evidence indicating that petitioner received any
significant benefit from the unpaid Federal tax liabilities.
Therefore, the Court concludes that this factor weighs in favor
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008