Cimberly Catherine Clarke-Lewis - Page 19




                                       - 18 -                                         
          of relief.  See Magee v. Commissioner, supra (stating that lack             
          of significant benefit weighed in favor of relief under Rev.                
          Proc. 2003-61); cf. Butner v. Commissioner, supra (stating that             
          lack of significant benefit weighed in favor of relief under                
          former section 6013(e) notwithstanding that Rev. Proc. 2000-15              
          stated that it was neutral); Ferrarese v. Commissioner, T.C.                
          Memo. 2002-249.                                                             
          Compliance With Federal Tax Laws                                            
               The IRS will take into consideration whether the requesting            
          spouse had made a good faith effort to comply with Federal tax              
          laws in succeeding years.  See Rev. Proc. 2003-61, sec.                     
          4.03(2)(a)(vi), 2003-2 C.B. at 299.                                         
               Petitioner and Mr. Nakasu received an extension until August           
          15, 2002, to file their 2001 joint Federal income tax return; the           
          IRS received the return on November 27, 2002.  Petitioner                   
          testified that she believed that Mr. Nakasu “forged” her name on            
          that return.  Petitioner has not otherwise renounced the joint              
          return or filed a separate return for that year.                            
               Petitioner’s 2002 return was timely filed and showed an                
          overpayment that was applied to 2000.                                       
               Petitioner received an extension to file her 2003 return               
          until October 15, 2004; however, she filed the return late and              
          without remittance of the tax on March 3, 2005.  At trial,                  
          petitioner testified that she did not timely file because the               







Page:  Previous  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  Next 

Last modified: March 27, 2008