The opinion
T.C. Memo. 2002-187
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
JACQUELYN BROWN, Petitioner v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Docket No. 5978-00. Filed August 5, 2002.
Jacquelyn Brown, pro se.
Richard A. Stone, for respondent.
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
COLVIN, Judge: Petitioner filed a Form 8857, Request for
Innocent Spouse Relief, in which she sought relief from joint and
several liability for tax years 1988-90. Respondent determined
that petitioner is not entitled to relief from joint and several
liability under section 6015(b), (c), or (f). Petitioner filed a
petition under section 6015(e)(1) in which she contended that she
- 2 -
is entitled to relief from joint and several liability for those
years.
Respondent now concedes that petitioner is entitled to
relief from joint liability for tax for 1989 and 1990, and for
tax arising from $2,923 of Hoffman J. Brown’s income in 1988.
After respondent’s concessions, the sole issue for decision is
whether respondent’s denial of petitioner’s request for relief
from the remainder of the 1988 tax liability was an abuse of
discretion. We hold that it was not.
Unless otherwise specified, section references are to the
Internal Revenue Code in effect for the applicable years.
References to Hoffman J. Brown (Brown) are to petitioner’s
husband. References to the Browns are to petitioner and Brown.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.
A. Petitioner, Her Husband, and Their Joint Tax Returns
Petitioner resided in Baltimore, Maryland, when she filed
the petition in this case. Brown was a minister at the Main
Street Baptist Church in Smithfield, Virginia, in 1988, 1989, and
1990.
Brown reported the income from his ministry on Schedules C,
Profit or Loss From Business, attached to his and petitioner’s
1988-90 returns.
- 3 -
B. Assessment and Payment of the Browns’ 1988 Tax Liability
Respondent mailed the Browns a notice of deficiency for
1988-90 on March 25, 1994. In it, respondent determined that the
compensation that Brown had reported as income from self-
employment was wages. Neither petitioner nor Brown filed a
petition in the Tax Court in response to the notice of
deficiency. On August 10, 1994, respondent assessed taxes based
on the March 25, 1994, notice of deficiency.
Respondent applied the Browns’ overpayments of tax for 1994,
1995, 1996, and 1997 to their 1988 tax liability as follows:
Year of Date Amount
overpayment applied applied
1994 May 1, 1995 $179
1995 Apr. 29, 1996 1,801
1994 May 20, 1996 1,196
1996 Apr. 21, 1997 2,507
1997 May 18, 1998 3,054
The Browns’ 1988 tax liability was paid in full on May 18,
1998.
OPINION
Petitioner contends that she is entitled to relief from
joint and several liability for 1988 under section 6015. We
disagree. Section 6015 does not apply to any liability for tax
arising before July 22, 1998, except to the extent it remained
unpaid as of that date. Internal Revenue Service Restructuring
and Reform Act of 1998 (RRA), Pub. L. 105-206, sec. 3201(g)(1),
112 Stat. 740; Butler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 276, 281-282
- 4 -
(2000). Petitioner is not entitled to relief for 1988 under
section 6015 because the Browns’ 1988 tax liability was paid in
full on May 18, 1998, which is before July 22, 1998. Miller v.
Commissioner, 115 T.C. 582, 587 (2000), affd. 21 Fed. Appx. 160
(4th Cir. 2001); Mlay v. IRS, 168 F. Supp. 2d 781, 785 (S.D. Ohio
2001).
Congress expanded the relief available to joint filers by
repealing section 6013(e) in 1998 and enacting section 6015. RRA
sec. 3201(a), (e)(1), 112 Stat. 734, 740. Section 6015 applies
to any liability for tax arising on or before July 22, 1998, but
remaining unpaid as of that date. RRA sec. 3201(g)(1), 112 Stat
740. However, petitioner’s tax was paid in full before the
effective date of section 6015. Thus, her claim is governed by
section 6013(e).1
We are aware of no provision in the Internal Revenue Code
which allows us to grant relief under section 6013(e) to a
taxpayer, such as petitioner in this case, who filed a “stand-
1
The four requirements for relief under sec. 6013(e) are:
(1) A joint return was filed for the year at issue; (2) the
return contained a substantial understatement of tax attributable
to grossly erroneous items of the other spouse; (3) the spouse
seeking relief establishes that, in signing the return, he or she
did not know, and had no reason to know, of the substantial
understatement; and (4) it would be inequitable to hold the
spouse seeking relief liable for the substantial understatement.
Sec. 6013(e)(1).
- 5 -
alone” petition under section 6015(e)(1).2 Section 6015(e)(1)
provides jurisdiction to decide the appropriate relief available
to the taxpayer under section 6015. It does not refer to section
6013(e), consistent with the repeal of section 6013(e) by the
RRA.
To account for respondent’s concessions,
Decision will be
entered under Rule 155.3
2
Under sec. 6013(e), a claim for relief in the Tax Court
was an affirmative defense in a deficiency proceeding.
Petitioner’s opportunity to raise an affirmative defense under
sec. 6013(e) in that fashion ended in 1994 when the 90-day period
to file a deficiency suit expired.
3
We infer that Hoffman J. Brown either had notice of his
right to intervene as contemplated by sec. 6015(e)(4) and Rule
325, or waived his right to that notice and the opportunity to
intervene, based on the fact that he attended trial with
petitioner, spoke on the record, and apparently supported
petitioner’s claim for relief under sec. 6015.