§6013 — Joint returns of income tax by husband and wife

926, 937 (1988) (overruling Goldberg v.

6013 (d) (3). With respect to 1996, because the fraud penalty does not apply to either petitioner, respondent may not rely on section 6501(c) to extend the limitations period.

6013 (providing for filing of joint returns). Penland did not file a joint rgturn for 1998, 1999, or 2001. Thus section:6015 is inapplicable Ñere.

6013 (d) (3). A spouse or former spouse may petition the Commissioner for relief from joint and several liability in certain circumstances. See sec. 6015(a). In cases involving an underpayment of tax, as here, sec. 6015(b) and (c) does not apply but equitable relief may be available under subsec.

6013(d)(3). In certain situations, however, a joint return filer can avoid such joint and several liability by qualifying for relief therefrom under section 6015.1 Section 6015 applies to any liability for tax arising after July 22, 1998, and to any liability for tax arising on or before July 22, 1998, but remaining unpaid as of such date. Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206, sec. 3201(g), 112 Stat. 740. Section 6015 does not apply if the tax was paid i

Every married individual may make a single return jointly with his or her spouse under section 6013 or may make a separate return. See sec. 1(a), (d). An individual shall not be considered married if, at the end of the taxable year, such individual is legally separated from his or her spouse under a decree of divorce or of separate maintenance. Sec. 7703(a). Married filing jointly status does not apply to a Federal income tax return unless both spouses intend to make a joint return.

6013(d)(3). However, under certain circumstances, section 6015 provides relief from this general rule.4 Section 6015 applies to any liability for tax arising after July 22, 1998, and to any liability for tax arising on or before July 22, 1998, but remaining unpaid as of such date. Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (RRA 1998), Pub. L. 105-206, sec. 3201(g), 112 Stat. 685, 740. Section 6015 does not apply if the tax was paid in full on or before July 22, 1998.

6013(d)(3). Under certain circumstances, however, section 6015 provides relief from this general rule.4 Section 6015 applies to any liability for tax arising after July 22, 1998, and to any liability for tax arising on or before July 22, 1998, but remaining unpaid as of such date. Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206, sec. 3201(g), 112 Stat. 740. Section 6015 does not apply if the tax was paid in full on or before July 22, 1998.

First, section 6015(b) provides for traditional relief from joint and several liability following the model of former section 6013(e). Second, section 6015(c) provides for an allocation of liability as if the spouses had filed separate returns. Finally, section 6015(f) provides for relief on other equitable grounds, but only if section 6015(b) and (c) does not apply.6 Issue 1.

Additionally, unlike former section 6013(e), which encompassed only substantial understatements attributable to grossly erroneous items, new section 6015(b) encompasses any understatement.

We need not decide whether petitioner satisfies the requirements of subparagraphs (B) and (C) because, taking into account all of the facts and circumstances as required by subparagraph (D), we find that it would not be inequitable to hold her liable for the deficiencies in tax.

- 16 - We do not agree with petitioner’s standard of inquiry.

Pursuant to section 6013(a), a married couple may elect to file a joint return.

Accordingly, we hold petitioner knew or had reason to know ofthe understatement and she fails to meet the requirements of section 6015(b)(1)(C).

To qualify for the tax rate applicable tojoint filers, a taxpayermust file ajoint return with his spouse pursuant to section 6013.

Powerstein's accounting practice.: We hold they are to the extent stated herein; (4) hether petitioners are entïtled to a $.22,290 loss as reported on their 1988 Schedule F.

Therefore, we hold that the 2006 return is not a joint return under.

Powerstein's accounting practice.: We hold they are to the extent stated herein; (4) hether petitioners are entïtled to a $.22,290 loss as reported on their 1988 Schedule F.

Accordingly, we hold that Mr .

Filing Status Pursuant to section 6013, a husband and wife may generally file a joint Federal income tax return .

To receive the benefit of joint return rates, taxpayers must file a valid joint return pursuant to section 6013 .

To receive the benefit of joint return rates, taxpayers must file a valid joint return pursuant to section 6013 .

However, respondent contends that pursuant to section 6013(b)(2)(B) petitioner is not entitled to file a joint return with his spouse because the Commissioner mailed a notice of deficiency for the taxable year 2003 to petitioner and, after receipt, petitioner timely filed a petition in this Court.

Filing Status In order to qualify for rates applicable to “Married Individuals Filing Joint Returns”, an individual must make a joint return with his or her spouse pursuant to section 6013.

We hold that the offer in compromise is valid and petitioner is barred from seeking relief from joint and several liability.

In those circumstances, we hold that the closing agreement does not preclude petitioner from asserting a claim for relief under section 6015.

We hold that petitioner is not entitled to file a joint return for the taxable year 1997.

Therefore, we hold that petitioners are not entitled to head of household filing status.

Therefore, we hold that petitioners are not entitled to head of household filing status.

Under the circumstances, we hold that respondent was free to issue a separate notice of intent to levy to petitioner Dudley Moorhous before issuing a similar notice to petitioner Dorothy Moorhous.6 Because petitioners are not treated as one person under section 6330, petitioner Dudley 6 Indeed, in 1998, the Congress directed the C

In 1995, respondent granted Vida Lee innocent spouse relief pursuant to section 6013(e).

For requests (like the one at issue in this case) made during the intervening four years, we apply the regulations interpreting section 6013, the predecessor of section 6015, in cases arising under section 6015(b).

Section 6013(b)(2) enumerates four limitations on filing an amended return under section 6013(b)(1). Section 6013(b)(2)(B) specificallybars taxpayers from electing to file ajoint return after filing a separate return "afterthere has been mailed to either spouse, with respect to such taxable year, a notice ofdeficiency under section 6212, ifthe spouse, as to such notice, files a petition with the Tax Court within the time prescribed in section 6213". As noted above, petitioner filed a timely peti

alternative means of relief for a requesting spouse who does not otherwise qualify for relief 18Because petitioner abdicated her right and responsibility to inspect her 1979-81 joint tax returns and therefore did not make any attempt to inquire regarding the SGA losses on the returns, this case is distinguishable from Friedman v. Commissioner, 53 F.3d 523 (2d Cir. 1995), affg. in part and revg. in part T.C. Memo. 1993-549. In Friedman v. Commissioner, supra at 531, the Court of Appeals for the S

Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1963-260, affd. 341 F.2d 201 (2d Cir. 1965); see also Dillin v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 228, 248 (1971). Accordingly, we hold that petitioner is liable for the additions to tax for negligence for 1986. Decision will be entered under Rule 155. 9Petitioner has not raised entitlement to relief from joint liability under either sec. 6013 or sec. 6015, which replaced sec. 6013.

Bacon relief from joint and several liability pursuant to former section 6013(e) prior to July 22, 1998, she had no liability for the assessed 1990 tax deficiency on any date thereafter, including July 22, 1998. Ms. Bacon did not have, and could not have had, any liability for the assessed 1990 tax deficiency which arose on or before July 22, 1998, when Congress enacted section 6015, and which remained unpaid as of that date. See id. We conclude that section 6015 has no application to, and does

ection (c) of section 424 of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 (relating to innocent spouse relieved of liability in certain cases) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph: "(3) Transitional Rule.--If-- "(A) a joint return under section 6013 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 was filed before January 1, 1985, "(B) on such return there is an understatement (as defined in section 6661(b)(2)(A) of such Code) which is attributable to disallowed deductions attributable to activ

The Further Judgment contained a provision which relieved either party of liability for unpaid income taxes; i.e., "to the extent either party is relieved, in whole or in part, of any liability in connection therewith pursuant to section 6013 of the Internal Revenue Code or any successor statute (and/or any similar provision of California law)." Petitioner was generally aware of the terms and negotiations which led to the Further Judgment, but she did not pay close attention to any provisions re

ection (c) of section 424 of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 (relating to innocent spouse relieved of liability in certain cases) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new paragraph: "(3) Transitional Rule.--If-- "(A) a joint return under section 6013 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 was filed before January 1, 1985, "(B) on such return there is an understatement (as defined in section 6661(b)(2)(A) of such Code) which is attributable to disallowed deductions attributable to activ

Evans is an "innocent spouse" under section 6013 for any of the years.

computed on their combined income, expenses, and credits, and their liability for the tax isjoint and several. See sec. 6013(d)(3). To qualify for the tax rate applicable tojoint filers, a taxpayermust file ajoint return with his spouse pursuant to section 6013. See sec. 1(a)(1); see also Brunner v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-187, aff'd, 142 Fed. Appx. 53 (3d Cir. 2005). "[W]here the taxpayerhas filed no return as ofthe date the case is submitted for decision * * * no returns would be in the

s therefore required to file an income tax return. C. Filing Status In order to qualify to calculate tax under rates applicable to “Married Individuals Filing Joint Returns”, an individual must make a joint return with his or her spouse pursuant to section 6013. Sec. 1(a)(1). Joint filing status is not allowable, unless a joint return is filed and made a part of the record before the case is submitted to our Court for decision. Phillips v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 433, 441 n.7 (1986), affd. in rele

Section 6013 in general entitles married taxpayers to make a joint income tax return. See sec. 6013(a). Section 6013(b)(1) further provides that even where a taxpayer has filed a separate 21 Petitioner also argues that, because he elected to make a joint return under sec. 6013(b), the notice of deficiency is invalid because it was sent to him alone

the return contained a substantial understatement of tax attributable to grossly erroneous items of the other spouse; (3) in signing the return, the spouse seeking relief did not know, and had no reason to know, of the (continued...) - 10 - former section 6013. Petitioner claims that the facts on which this Court based its opinion were open and obvious hnd gave no reason for respondent to refuse to grant relief. Finally, petitioner contends that caselaw under former section 6013(e) and current s

the return contained a substantial understatement of tax attributable to grossly erroneous items of the other spouse; (3) in signing the return, the spouse seeking relief did not know, and had no reason to know, of the (continued...) - 10 - former section 6013. Petitioner claims that the facts on which this Court based its opinion were open and obvious and gave no reason for respondent to refuse to grant relief. Finally, petitioner contends that caselaw under former section 6013(e) and current s

1986. Gerald Dennis Strong, pro se. Innessa Glazman, for respondent. MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION CHABOT, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency in individual income tax and an addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1)1 (failure to timely file tax return) against petitioner for 1994 in the amounts of $108,941 and $5,5

___ (2000), we discussed the history of old section 6013 and new section 6015 in detail, and we do not repeat that discussion here.

Since petitioner did not make a single return jointly with his wife under section 6013, we hold that his proper filing status for 1992, 1993, and 1994 was married filing separately.

To qualify for statutory relief from joint and several liability under section 6013(e),10 a putative innocent spouse must establish: (1) A joint return was made under section 6013; 10 We apply the statute as amended by Congress in 1984 even though the year before us is 1979.

However, pursuant to section 6013 (e) , a spouse (commonly referred to as an innocent spouse) can be relieved of tax liability if that spouse proves: (1) A joint income tax return was filed; (2) the return contained a substantial understatement of tax attributable to grossly erroneous items of the other spouse; (3) in signing the return, the spouse seeking relief did n

Respondent contends, however, that petitioner does not meet the remaining section 6013 requirements.

261. Further, the items disallowed were not solely attributable to Mr. Edmondson. Some relate primarily to Glass Onion Records, a business in which petitioner participated with Mr. Edmondson. 5 The phrase "no basis in fact or law," is not defined in sec. 6013. The courts, however, have held that a deduction has no basis in fact when the expense for which the deduction is claimed was never made, and a deduction has no basis in law when the expense, even if made, does not qualify as a deductible e

e amount of $8,241, an addition to tax pursuant to section 6651(a) in the amount of $894.25, and an addition to tax pursuant to section 6654 in the amount of $175.85.2 The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner timely filed his 1991 Federal income tax return;3 (2) whether petitioner can elect married filing joint return status pursuant to section 6013; (3) whether 2 We granted respondent's motion for leave to amend her answer to conform the pleadings to the evidence presented.

ent of tax on a joint return. Bokum v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. at 148. For the reasons discussed above, we find that petitioner does not meet the requirements of section 6013(e)(1)(C). Accordingly, petitioner is not entitled to the relief provided by section 6013. It is unnecessary for us to consider petitioner's arguments under section 6013(e)(1)(D). Additions to Tax for Fraud Respondent determined that Mr. DiMichele is liable for the additions to tax for fraud pursuant to section 6653(b)(1) and

The record clearly shows that Mrs. Gaskins had no actual knowledge of any understatement of Mr. Gaskins' income and the resulting substantial understatement of tax. The question is whether she had reason to know about such understatement. A spouse has "reason to know" if a reasonably prudent taxpayer under the taxpayer's circum

They therefore would not be entitled to the rates available under section 6013 to a married individual who files a tax return jointly with his or her spouse.

Section 6013(d)(3) provides that, if a joint return is filed for a particular tax year, each spouse is jointly and severally liable for the entire tax due.

Fairbank received innocent spouse relief from her joint and several federal income tax liabilities under section 6013(e) for tax years 1980 and 1981 pursuant to a stipulated decision of this Court.

When they do, their tax for that year is based on their aggregate income and deductions, and their liability for any tax due is joint and several. I.R.C. § 6013(d)(3); Alt v. Commissioner, 119 T.C. 306, 311 (2002), aff’d, 101 F. App’x 34 (6th Cir. 2004). This means that the Commissioner is free to collect from either spouse the entir

Petitioner claims that “[n]o weight should be given to any potential argument that any IRC § 6013 [sic] post-signature violation does not invalidate an executed Closing Agreement.” Petitioner made that claim in the brief she submitted before the issuance of our opinion in Smith.

494, 801 (codified at § 6013), but it still required that a spouse seeking relief show that the joint return showed “a substantial understatement of tax attributable to grossly erroneous items of [the other] spouse,” that she signed the return without knowing and without having reason to know of the substantial understatement, and that it would be inequitable to hold he

Section 6013(d)(3) provides that, if a joint return is filed, each spouse is jointly and severally liable for the entire tax due for that year.

6013 (allowing married couples to filejoint returns); Dritz v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1969-175, 28 T.C.M. (CCH) 874, 880 (1969) (holding that the privilege of joint filing status depends on an election made by "the 'making ofa return,' as provided in section 6013"), affd, 427 F.2d 1176 (5th Cir. 1970). -5- [*5] unsigned returns for 2007 and

6013 (allowing married couples to filejoint returns); Dritz v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1969-175, 28 T.C.M. (CCH) 874, 880 (1969) (holding that the privilege of joint filing status depends on an election made by "the 'making ofa return,' as provided in section 6013"), affd, 427 F.2d 1176 (5th Cir. 1970). -5- [*5] unsigned returns for 2007 and

Section 6013(d)(3) provides that ifajoint return is filed each spouse isjointly and severally liable for the entire tax due for that year.

Section 6013(d)(3) provides that ifajoint return is filed each spouse isjointly and severally liable for the entire tax due for that year.

Section 6013(d)(3) provides that ifajoint return is filed each spouse isjointly and severally liable for the entire tax due for that year.

Section 6013(d)(3) provides that if ajoint return is filed each spouse isjointly and severally liable for the entire tax due for that year.

Section 6015(f) Section 6013 allows married taxpayers to file ajoint Federal income tax return.

Section 6013(d)(3) provides that ifajoint return is filed each spouse isjointly and severally liable for the entire tax due for that year.

As pertinent here, section 152(c)(2) provides that a person bears a relation- ship to the taxpayer for purposes ofsection 152(c)(1)(A) "ifsuch individual is-- (A) a child ofthe taxpayer or a descendant ofsuch a child, or (B) a brother, sister, stepbrother, or stepsister ofthe taxpayer or a descendant ofany such relative." As pertinent here, section

re than one-halfofsuch taxable year, - 6 - (C) who meets the age requirements ofparagraph (3), (D) who has not provided over one-halfofsuch individual's own support for the calendar year in which the taxable year ofthe taxpayerbegins, and (E) who has not filed ajoint return (other than only for a claim ofrefund) with the individual's spouse under section 6013 for the taxable year beginning in the calendar year in which the taxable year ofthe taxpayer begins.

s a nonresident alien individual for any portion ofthe taxable year, this section shall apply only ifsuch individual is treated as a resident alien ofthe United States for purposes ofthis chapter by reason ofan election under subsection (g) or (h) ofsection 6013. Subsections (g) and (h) ofsection 6013 permit a nonresident alien individual who is married to a citizen or resident ofthe United States tojoin with his or her spouse 3Sec. 25A(b)(3) provides as follows: (3) Eligible student.--Forpurpos

Additionally, to be a qualifying child, the person must have had the same principal place ofabode as the taxpayer for more than one-halfofthe taxable year, must meet age requirements, must not have provided over one-halfofhis or her own support for the taxable year, and must not have filed ajoint return with the person's spouse under section 6013 for the taxable year beginning in the calendar year in which the taxable year ofthe taxpayerbegins.

In addition to other requirements which the parties agreed are satisfied, a qualifying child must be an individual who has not filed ajoint return with the individual's spouse under section 6013 for the same taxable year for which the taxpayer is claiming the qualifying child.

for more than one-halfofsuch taxable year, (C) who meets the age requirements ofparagraph (3), (D) who has not provided over one-halfofsuch individual's own support for the calendar year in which the taxable year ofthe taxpayerbegins, and (E) who has not filed ajoint return (other than only for a claim ofrefund) with the individual's spouse under section 6013 for the taxable yearbeginning in the calendar year in which the taxable year ofthe taxpayer begins.

152(e)(2)(B); (2) has the same principal place ofabode as the taxpayer for more than one-halfofthe taxable year; (3) meets certain age requirements; and (4) who has not filed ajoint return, other than only for a claim ofrefund, with the individual's spouse under section 6013 for the taxable year beginning in the calendar year in which the taxable year ofthe taxpayer begins, see secs.

Moreover, the individual must have had the same principal place ofabode as the taxpayer for more than one-halfofthe taxable year, meet certain age requirements, must not have provided over one-halfofhis or her own support for the taxable year, and must not have filed ajoint return with the individual's spouse under section 6013 for the taxable year beginning in the calendar year in which the taxable year ofthe taxpayerbegins.

With exceptions not applicable herein, section 6013(a) provides that a husband and wife may file a returnjointly even though one ofthe spouses has neither gross income nor deductions.

With exceptions not applicable herein, section 6013(a) provides that a husband and wife may file a returnjointly even though one ofthe spouses has neither gross income nor deductions.

1.6015-3(a), Income Tax Regs. Decision will be entered under Rule 155. "Petitioners' filing oftheirjointFederal income tax returns for 2008 and 2009 was not permitted and therefore they are treated as filing separately. See sec. 6013(a); secs. 1.6013-(4)(a), 1.6013-6(b)(3), Income Tax Regs.

for more than one-halfofsuch taxable year, (C) who meets the age requirements ofparagraph (3), (D) who has not provided over one-halfofsuch individual's own support for the calendar year in which the taxable year ofthe taxpayerbegins, and (E) who has not filed ajoint return (other than only for a claim ofrefund) with the individual's spouse under section 6013 for the taxable year beginning in the calendaryear in whichthe taxable year ofthe taxpayer begins.

stablish that the Waukegan property was leased for a fair rental value durirg 2008, we need not and do not address these arguments. - 8 - [*8] qualifying child or qualifying relative ifthe individual files ajoint return with his or her spouse under section 6013. Petitioners claimed a dependency exemption deduction for J.L. Because J.L. filed ajoint return with her husband for tax year 2008, petitioners are not entitled to a dependency exemption deduction for her. See sec. 152(b)(2). Consequently

1.6017-1(b)(1), Income Tax Regs., provides: In the case ofa husband and wife filing ajoint return under section 6013, the tax on self-employment income is computed on the separate self-employment income ofeach spouse, and not on the aggregate of the two amounts.

1431 (2006)(relating to children born outside ofthe United States and residing permanently in the United States)). Petitioners have another child, their tenth, who was born in November 2008 and became a U.S. citizen in October 2009. 3 See generally sec. 6013 (permittingjoint returns by husband and wife). See sec. 6013(g) (permitting an election to treat a nonresident alien individual as a resident ofthe United States). On their Federal income tax returns for the years in issue, petitioners clai

6013 (a) (defining a joint return as that made by a "husband and wife"); sec. 6013(d) (1) (A) (status as husband and wife of two individuals having taxable years beginning on the same day is determined as of the close of the year). Persons who are not legally married because of an impediment to a legal marriage on the part of one party are not

1995) (discussing former section 6013), aff'a T.C.

6013 (a) (defining a joint return as that made by a "husband and wife"); sec. 6013(d) (1) (A) (status as husband and wife of two individuals having taxable years beginning on the same day is determined as of the close of the year). Persons who are not legally married because of an impediment to a legal marriage on the part of one party are not

- 6 - .(E) whò has not filed ajoint return (other than only for a claim ofrefund) with the individual's spouse under section 6013 for the taxable year beginning in the calendar year in which the taxable year ofthe taxpayerbegins.

y's financial affairs; (3) the nonrequesting spouse's evasiveness and deceit concerning the family's financial affairs; and (4) the presence of expendi- "The requirement of sec. 6015(b) (1) (C) is substantially identical to the requirement of former sec. 6013 (e) (1) (C). As a result, cases interpreting former sec. 6013 (e) (1) (C) remain instructive to our analysis under sec. 6015(b) (1) (C). Butler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 276, 283 (2000). - 42 - tures that are lavish or unusual when compared

6013 (d) (3) ; see also sec . 1. 6013-4 (b) ; Income Tax Regs . In certain limited circumstances, however, section 6015 perinits an individual who has made a joint return to seek relief from joint and several liability. Petitioner argues that she is entitled to relief under subsections (b) , (c) , and (f) of section 6015. Respondent argues tha

Section 6013(a) provides that a "husband and wife may make a single return jointly of income taxes".

- After making the "Respondent nasragreed that petitioner's request was timelya "The record in-this case is unclear as to the amount of relief respondent conceded and the balance respondent claims petitioner still owes. I-t,would appear that any tax liability attributable to petitioner would have been fully paid by her withholding a

1.6017-1(b) (1), Income Tax Regs., provides: In the case of a husband and wife filing a joint return under section 6013, the tax on self-employment income is computed on the separate self-edployment income of each spouse, and not on the aggregate of the two amounts.

Section 6015 allows a spouse to obtain relief from joint and several - 16 - liability in certain circumstances. Section 6015(a) (1) provides that a spouse who has made a joint return may elect to seek relief from joint and several liability under section 6015(b) (de_aling with relief from liability for an understatement of tax w

A spouse (requesting spouse) may elect to have the liability limited to his or her proportionate share of the liability, however, if the spouses are divorced, legally separated, or living apart for the 12 months preceding the sRespondent's proposed computations result in allocated penalties of $369.50 for 1994, $791.60 for 1995

notwithstanding that Rev . Proc . 2000-15, supra, states that it is neutral) . Petitioner's Compliance . With Federal Income Tax Laws In the tax years following the years to which the request for relief relates petitioner was . in compliance with her. Federal rincome tax obligations . See Rev . Proc . 2003-61, sec . 4 .03(2)(a)(

Taxpayers who have filed a joint Federal income tax return under section 6013 are treated separately for purposes-o f 2A notice of deficiency provides taxpayers with important procedural safeguards by allowing them 90 days, or 150 days if the notice is addressed to a person outside the United States,°'to petition this Court for a redetermination of the deficiency as a prerequisite to assessment .

6013 (d) (3); sec..1.6013-4(b), Income Tax Regs. A spouse may be relieved from joint and several liability under section 6015(f) if, taking into account all the facts and circumstances, it would be. inequitable to hold him liable for any unpaid tax or deficiency. The Commissioner has published revenue procedures listing the factors normally co

nearly 2 years after the time prescribed by section 6013 (b) (2) (A) .

Section 6013(d)(3) provides that if a married couple files a joint Federal income tax return , the couple's liability for-the tax shalll .be joint .and,several .

Every married individual (as defined in section 7703) who makes a single return, jointly with his spouse under section 6013 is subject to married filing joint return status .

8493-96 he, was granted partial relief .under .former section 6013.(e),Iwe are bound under' section .

Commissioner, supra (stating that lack of significant benefit weighed in favor of relief under former section 6013 (e) notwithstanding that Rev.

innocence we look for “within the meaning of this statute is innocent vis-a-vis a guilty spouse whose income is concealed from the innocent and spent outside the family.” Bliss v. Commissioner, 59 F.3d 374, 380 n.3 (2d Cir. 1995) (discussing former section 6013), affg. T.C. Memo. 1993-390. The knowledge factor’s unique importance is, seen in this way, entirely appropriate because in the ordinary course of events knowing her husband is mishandling their joint return would allow a wife to begin to

Section 32(d) provides : "In the case of an individual who is married (within the meaning of section 7703), this section shall apply only if !a joint return is filed for the taxable year under section 6013 ." Section 7703(a)(1) provides that "the determination of whether an individual is married shall be made as of the close of his taxable year" and that certain married individuals living apart shall not be considered as married .

be allowed a credit which is calculated as a percentage of the individual's earned income . Sec . 32(a)(1) . In the case of an individual who is married, the earned income credit is allowed only if a joint return is filed for the taxable year under section 6013 . Sec . 32(d) . As mentioned above, petitioner did not file a joint return for 2002 . Section 6013(b)(1) provides generally that where a taxpayer has filed a separate return for a taxable year and the time prescribed for filing has expir

In addition, section 7703(b) provides that an individual who is married shall not be considered as married if four requirements are satisfied : (1) The individual files separately; (2) the individual maintains as his home a household which constitutes for more than one-half of the taxable year the principal place of - 10 - abode of a child

Section 32(d) provides, however: "In the case of an individual who is married (within the meaning of section 7703), this section shall apply only if a joint return is filed for the taxable year under section 6013." As discussed supra, the Court finds that petitioner was married during 2000, and, since he and his wife did not file a joint return, concludes that he is not entitled to claim an earned

In addition, section 7703(b) provides that an individual who is married shall not be considered as married if four requirements are satisfied : (1) The individual files separately; (2) the individual maintains as his home a household which constitutes for more than one-half of the taxable year the principal place of - 10 - abode of a child

Section 6013 defines a joint return as that made by a “husband and wife”. Sec. 6013(a). In the administration of the Federal income tax laws, the marital status of individuals is determined under State law where the taxpayer resides. Von Tersch v. Commissioner, 47 T.C. 415, 419 (1967); Rev. Rul. 58-66, 1958-1 C.B. 60. Accordingly, we now consider p

On April 9, 1992, the petition in the 1989 case was amended to claim innocent spouse treatment for petitioner under section 6013(e,) as it then existed.

Section 6013 Compared With Section 6015 Contrary to the view of the majority, the evolution of former section 6013(e) into section 6015 shows that Congress intended to disregard community property laws with respect to all of section 6015 and not to limit disregarding community property laws to determining whether an electing spouse is entitled to r

A closing agreement entered into before the effective date of sec. 6015, however, does not cut off a claim for innocent spouse relief under that section. Hopkins v. Commissioner, 120 T.C. 451 (2003). Under the former innocent spouse relief statute, sec. 6013(e), a closing agreement, even one that determined liability only with regard to specific issues, precluded a taxpayer’s later claim for innocent spouse relief where the defense was not preserved in the text of the closing agreement. See Hopk

ursuant to the installment agreement while respondent was considering her request for relief under section 6015 . Respondent contends that a refund is barred under section 6015(g)(3) . Section 6015 , as amended, was enacted in 1998 to replace former section 6013 ( e) . Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 , Pub . L . 105-206, sec . 3201, 112 Stat . 685, 734 . Section 6015 provides relief from joint and several liability for certain taxpayers who file a joint Federal inco

---- 17,409 due on $69,635 In a separate notice of deficiency, also dated November 15, 1991, respondent determined deficiencies of $329,911 and $90,590 in Martha McHan’s respective 1985 and 1986 Federal income taxes, which deficiencies are based solely on Martha’s alleged joint liability under section 6013 for the tax deficiencies determined against petitioner.

er subsequent tax returns that were applied towards her joint tax liabilities for taxable years 1995 and 1996. Respondent contends that a refund is barred because of section 6015(g)(3). Section 6015, as amended, was enacted in 1998 to replace former section 6013(e). Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206, sec. 3201, 112 Stat. 734. Section 6015 provides relief from joint and several liability for certain taxpayers who file a joint Federal income tax return.

Section 6013 Compared With Section 6016 Contrary to the view of the majority, the evolution of former section 6013(e) into section 6015 shows that Congress intended to disregard community property laws with respect to all of section 6015 and not to limit disregarding community property laws to determining whether an electing spouse is entitled to r

d 441, 442 (9th Cir. 1990), affg. T.C. Memo. 1987-522; Price v. Commissioner, 887 F.2d 959 (9th Cir. 1989); Laird v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-564. These cases involved relief from joint and several liability on a joint return pursuant to former sec. 6013 and sec. 6015 rather than relief under sec. 66. However, we believe that interpretations of spousal relief from joint liability are instructive to our interpretation of equitable relief from community income. See, e.g., Beck v. Commissioner

Section 32(d) provides that “In the case of an individual who is married (within the meaning of section 7703), this section shall apply only if a joint return is filed for the taxable year under section 6013”.

Filing of a Joint Return Section 6013 allows a husband and a wife to file a joint return.

ommissioner will consider only against granting relief. Thus, under Rev. Proc. 2000-15, supra, the tax compliance factor is neutral. 7 On the basis of caselaw deciding whether it was equitable to relieve a taxpayer from joint liability under former sec. 6013(e)(1)(D), we consider the fact that a taxpayer did not significantly benefit from the unpaid liability or item giving rise to the deficiency as a factor in favor of granting relief to that taxpayer. Ewing v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. ___ (2004)

herefore, was married and does not qualify for the head of household filing status. Respondent’s determination is sustained. Earned Income Credit An EIC is eligible to a married individual “only if a joint return is filed for the taxable year under section 6013.” Sec. - 4 - 32(d). Petitioner was a married individual who did not file a joint return for 2001. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to an EIC, and respondent’s determination is sustained. Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Smal

For a detailed discussion of the legislative history of section 6015 (and its predecessor, section 6013), see Cheshire v.

For a detailed discussion of the legislative history of section 6015 (and its predecessor, section 6013), see Cheshire v.

Section 7703(a) provides that an individual’s marital status shall be determined at the end of the taxable year and “an individual legally separated from his spouse under a decree of divorce or of separate maintenance shall not be considered as married.” Sec.

, he was married in 1998 because Maria resided with him only for approximately 4 months during 1998, and, therefore, he did not maintain “as his home a household which constitutes for more than one-half of the taxable year the principal place of abode of a child” as required by section 7703(b)(1).6 See also sec.

, he was married in 1998 because Maria resided with him only for approximately 4 months during 1998, and, therefore, he did not maintain “as his home a household which constitutes for more than one-half of the taxable year the principal place of abode of a child” as required by section 7703(b)(1).6 See also sec.

The Form 8857 used by petitioner does not reflect the repeal of section 6013(e) and enactment of section 6015.

163, 168-170 (continued...) - 37 - section 6653(a),3 section 6662,4 section 6013,5 section 6033,6 section 6651(f),7 section 6511,8 section 6011,9 section 6012,10 section 6072,11 and former section 6661,12 among others.

We apply this test to “returns” for purposes of section 6501, section 6651(a)(1), section 6653(a), section 6662, section 6013, section 6033, section 6651(f), section 6511, section 6011, section 6012, section 6072, and former section 6661, among others.

Alternatively, section 7703(b) provides that a taxpayer who is married under section 7703(a) and who files a separate return, 4 We note that respondent disallowed the head-of-household filing status in the notice of deficiency and treated petitioner as single.

20,367.00, together with statutory interest thereon, pursuant to Section 6015 of the Internal Revenue Code. Respondent argues that any refund is barred by section 6015(g)(3). Section 6015, as amended, was originally enacted in 1998 to replace former section 6013(e). Internal Revenue Service 2(...continued) trial that the excess was applied to assessed interest. Neither party specifically addressed this point, but respondent presumably has relieved petitioner from liability for any remaining unpa

ble relief if relief is not otherwise available to a spouse. The Court first addresses petitioner's claim for relief under section 6015(b). To qualify for relief under this provision, a taxpayer must establish that: (1) A joint return was made under section 6013. Sec. 6015(b)(1)(A). (2) There was an understatement of tax attributable to erroneous items of one spouse. Sec. 6015(b)(1)(B). (3) At the time of signing the return, the spouse seeking relief did not know and had no reason to know of suc

For a detailed discussion of the legislative history of section 6015 (and its predecessor section 6013), see Cheshire v.

Section 32(d) provides: “In the case of an individual who is married (within the meaning of section 7703), this section shall apply only if a joint return is filed for the taxable year under section 6013.” Since the Court has concluded that petitioner was considered married in 1998, and no joint return was filed for that year, petitioner is not entitled to the earned income credit.

On the basis of this conclusion, we consider it unnecessary to, and do not, consider petitioners’ alternative argument that section 6013 produces the same result.

For a detailed discussion of the legislative history of section 6015 (and its predecessor section 6013), see Cheshire v.

1976), we were called upon to determine the meaning of "the amount of gross income stated in the return", within the meaning of section 6013(e)(1) (A), relating to relief from joint liability, as that provision applied to 1955.

Present Law The RRA revised and expanded the relief available to joint filers by striking subsection (e) from section 6013 and by promulgating in its place a new section 6015.

To qualify for statutory relief from joint and several liability under section 6015(b)(1), a taxpayer must establish that: (1) A joint return was made under section 6013, see sec.

f sections 6013 and 6501, we commented as follows on the Commissioner's argument under section 70!2 (c) (Estate of Klein v. Commissioner, 63 T.C. at 591 & n.6): As we read the first sentence (of the Finance Committe e report on the 1970 enactment of sec. 6013 (e) ] we thinP "the income reported" by a partner includes his share of tl e gross income, as defined in section 6501(e)(1)(A)(i), lof the partnership. Rev. Rul. 55-415, 1955-1 C.B. 412; I.T. 3981, 1949-2 C.B. 78.6 Respondent cites sec. 702

(e) from section 6013 and by promulgating in its place a new section 6015.

At the time of the trial, section 6013 contained the provisions governing relief from joint liability or what has come to be known as “innocent spouse” relief.

ermined that petitioner's filing status was "married filing separately". Section 1(a) provides that the filing status married filing joint return applies only to "every married individual * * * who makes a single return jointly with his spouse under section 6013". From this language, it is clear that married taxpayers who fail to file returns are not entitled to married filing joint return tax rates. See Martinez v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998- 199, affd. 198 F.3d 242 (5th Cir. 1999); Collins

At the time of the trial, section 6013 contained the provisions governing relief from joint liability or what has come to be known as “innocent spouse” relief.

Present Innocent Spouse Law The Restructuring Act revised and expanded the relief available to joint filers by striking subsection (e) from section 6013 and by promulgating in its place a new section 6015.

Section 1, entitled “Tax Imposed”, provides in subsection (a): There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of-- (1) every married individual * * * who makes a single return jointly with his spouse under section 6013 * * * * * * * * * * a tax determined in accordance with the following table: * * * * * * * If taxable income is: The tax is: - 15 - * * * * * * * Over $32,450 but not over $78,400 .

Rather, he argues that section 86(c)(1)(C) and - 3 - (2)(C), which establishes, for purposes of calculating the taxable amount of his Social Security benefits, a "base amount" and an "adjusted base amount" of zero for taxpayers who were married and lived together during the taxable year but did not file jointly, and section 6013, which allows Ms.

See section 1, "There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of--(1) every married individual * * * who makes a single return jointly with his spouse under section 6013, * * * a tax determined in accordance with" the table provided.

In order to be eligible to compute tax using the joint return rates prescribed by section 1(a), the taxpayer must be a married individual who makes a joint return with his spouse under section 6013, or the taxpayer must be a sur- viving spouse.

Petitioners argue and we note that there is no definition of a return in section 6013 or the regulation thereunder, but the term “return” is addressed in connection with section 6103 (involving confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return information).