T.C. Summary Opinion 2010-107
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
LAURA A. BRADY, Petitioner v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Docket No. 22969-08S. Filed August 2, 2010.
Laura A. Brady, pro se.
John K. Parchman, for respondent.
CARLUZZO, Special Trial Judge: This section 6015(e)1 case
was heard pursuant to the provisions of section 7463. Pursuant
to section 7463(b), the decision to be entered is not reviewable
1
Unless otherwise indicated, section references are to the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, in effect for the
relevant period.
- 2 -
by any other court, and this opinion shall not be treated as
precedent for any other case.
In a final notice of determination dated June 26, 2008,
respondent denied petitioner’s claim for section 6015(f) relief
with respect to the joint and several liability arising from a
2003 Federal income tax return considered by respondent to have
been jointly filed by petitioner and Gregory Harris (Mr. Harris).
See sec. 6064.2
Background
Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.
At the time the petition was filed, petitioner resided in
Arkansas.
Petitioner and Mr. Harris first met sometime towards the end
of 2002. They were married on March 31, 2003. Afterwards
petitioner and one of her children from a previous marriage moved
in with Mr. Harris. This was petitioner’s third marriage.
Apparently, the third time is not always the charm. Petitioner
and Mr. Harris separated in early 2004 and were divorced on July
26 of that year. All told, they lived together for less than 1
year.
Petitioner was not employed during 2003 and otherwise had no
obligation to file a Federal income tax return for that year. At
2
Sec. 6064 provides “The fact that an individual’s name is
signed to a return * * * shall be prima facie evidence for all
purposes that the return * * * was actually signed by him.”
- 3 -
some point before October 2004 and in response to a request by
Mr. Harris, she provided him with her Social Security number and
the Social Security number of her child that lived with them.
On October 18, 2004, respondent received and caused to be
filed a 2003 joint Federal income tax return Mr. Harris prepared.
That return was signed by Mr. Harris. Although the return also
shows a signature purporting to be petitioner’s, she did not sign
the return or authorize anyone else to do so on her behalf.
Apparently, a large portion of the tax reported on that return
was not paid with the return and has not been paid since.
Petitioner first became aware of the liability arising from
the 2003 return when she was notified by respondent that a $28
refund claimed on her 2004 Federal income tax return was being
applied to her outstanding 2003 tax liability.
Discussion
Section 6015 relief from joint and several liability is not
available to a taxpayer for any given year if the taxpayer did
not file a joint Federal income tax return with the taxpayer’s
spouse for that year. See Raymond v. Commissioner, 119 T.C. 191,
194-197 (2002).
According to petitioner, the 2003 return Mr. Harris prepared
should not be treated as her return because she neither signed it
nor consented to its being signed on her behalf. Respondent now
agrees that petitioner did not sign the return. Nevertheless,
- 4 -
according to respondent, Mr. Harris prepared the 2003 return
with the implicit consent of petitioner, and it would not be
inequitable to hold her liable for the income tax liability
arising from that return. See secs. 6013(a), 6015(f).
We recognize that if both spouses intend and consent to file
a joint Federal income tax return for any given year, then the
failure of one spouse to sign the return for that year will not
necessarily preclude its treatment as a joint return. See, e.g.,
Estate of Campbell v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 1, 12 (1971); see
also Heim v. Commissioner, 27 T.C. 270, 273-274 (1956), affd. 251
F.2d 44 (8th Cir. 1958); Magee v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-
263; sec. 1.6013-1(a)(2), Income Tax Regs.
We further recognize that the requisite “consent” may be
inferred from behavior. In determining whether a nonsigning
spouse consented to file a joint return for any given year,
various factors are taken into account, such as: (1) Whether the
returns were prepared pursuant to an established practice of
preparing and filing joint returns; (2) whether the nonsigning
spouse failed to object to the filing of a joint return; (3)
whether an affirmative act was taken indicating an intention to
file other than jointly; (4) whether one spouse entirely relied
on the other spouse to file returns; (5) whether the spouse
examined returns presented for a signature; (6) whether separate
returns were filed; (7) whether the returns included the income
- 5 -
and deductions of the nonsigning spouse; and (8) whether the
nonsigning spouse was aware of the contents of the purported
joint returns. Estate of Campbell v. Commissioner, supra at 12-
13; Howell v. Commissioner, 10 T.C. 859 (1948), affd. per curiam
175 F.2d 240 (6th Cir. 1949); Boyle v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1994-294; Evans v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1982-700.
According to respondent, because petitioner supplied Mr.
Harris with her Social Security number and the Social Security
number of one of her children, she was aware of his intention to
file a joint return on her behalf and consented to his doing so.
The sharing of tax information between spouses, no doubt, might
be an indicia of the consent of each to file a joint return with
the other. Be that as it may, Mr. Harris would have needed the
same information because he was otherwise entitled to additional
exemption deductions for petitioner and her child regardless of
whether a joint return was filed. See sec. 151(a), (b), (c),
(e). There is no direct evidence on the point in the record, and
we have no basis for choosing one plausible explanation over the
other.
The marriage between petitioner and Mr. Harris lasted less
than 18 months. They obviously had no occasion to file, or
history of filing, a joint Federal income tax return with each
other for any year before 2003. In fact, the 2003 return here in
question was not prepared and filed until after they were
- 6 -
divorced. Petitioner did not sign the return, she was not
employed during 2003, and she had no obligation to file a Federal
income tax return for that year. See sec. 6012(a). We find that
the 2003 return Mr. Harris prepared that gave rise to the 2003
income tax liability from which petitioner seeks relief is
neither a joint return as contemplated by section 6013(a) nor
petitioner’s return. Accordingly, because petitioner did not
file a joint return with Mr. Harris for 2003, relief from her
outstanding 2003 Federal income tax liability, if otherwise
available, is not available in this proceeding.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
denying petitioner’s request for
relief under section 6015.