- 18 -
T.C. Memo. 2003-201, affd. 152 Fed. Appx. 622 (9th Cir. 2005).
Petitioner must establish that: (1) At the time she signed the
return for each of the years at issue, she had no knowledge or
reason to know that the tax reported on each return would not be
paid; and (2) it was reasonable for her to believe that Mr.
Lepordo would pay the tax reported on each return. See Ogonoski
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-52; Collier v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2002-144.
The Court has found for respondent on this factor.
Therefore, this factor weighs against relief. See Beatty v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-167 (applying Rev. Proc. 2003-61
and finding that knowledge or reason to know weighs against
relief); Fox v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-22 (same); cf. Levy
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-92 (applying Rev. Proc. 2000-15
and stating that lack of knowledge weighs in favor of relief
while knowledge or reason to know weighs against relief).
Knowledge or Reason To Know: Items Giving Rise to the $704.88
Portion of the Deficiency
With respect to a liability that arises from a deficiency,
the IRS will consider whether the requesting spouse did not know
or had no reason to know of the items giving rise to the
deficiency. Rev. Proc. 2003-61, sec 4.03(2)(a)(iii)(B), 2003-2
C.B. at 298. If the electing spouse had actual knowledge of the
item giving rise to the deficiency, then that knowledge is a
strong factor weighing against relief. See id.
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008