Case ID: f-appx_564/html/0885-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Joan THOMASSEN, Deceased; Mark D. Thomassen, Special Administrator, Petitioners-Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 11-73458.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 11, 2014.
    
    Filed March 19, 2014.
    Marilyn R. Thomassen, Esquire, Law Office of Marilyn Thomassen, Huntington Beach, CA, for Petitioners-Appellants.
    
      Mark D. Thomassen, Special Administrator, Pro Se.
    Robert R. Di Trolio, Esquire, Clerk, U.S. Tax Court, John A. Dicicco, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Gilbert Steven Rothenberg, Esquire, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Regina S. Moriarty, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, William J. Wilkins, Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, DC, for Respondent-Appellee.
    Before: WALLACE, McKEOWN, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Joan Thomassen appeals from the Tax Court’s denial of her petition for redeter-mination of federal income tax liabilities for 1964 to 1971. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a), and we affirm.

Thomassen argues that the Tax Court clearly erred in denying her Innocent Spouse Relief under Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) § 6015 for two particular years, 1966 and 1971, because it found she did not file joint tax returns in those years.

Under IRC § 1615(b)(1)(A), the taxpayer bears the burden of showing that the “couple filed a joint return.” Ordlock v. Comm’r, 533 F.3d 1136, 1139 (9th Cir.2008). Lacking copies of her tax returns for 1966 and 1971, Thomassen attempts to make this showing by inference, arguing that her typical filing of joint returns in the other years for which she sought Innocent Spouse Relief demonstrates that the same held true for 1966 and 1971. Tho-massen fails to substantiate this inference. To the contrary, a certified copy of the transcript of account for her husband Dr. Thomassen’s 1966 income tax return states his filing status as “single,” a Tax Court order from 1975 held Dr. Thomassen separately liable for deficiencies and additions to tax for 1966, and two notices of deficiency were issued for 1971, in different amounts and with one to “taxpayer” and one to Dr. Thomassen. In light of this evidence, the Tax Court did not clearly err in finding that Thomassen failed to show that she filed joint tax returns in 1966 and 1971.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
     
      
      . Joan Thomassen is now deceased, and Mark Thomassen, the special administrator of her estate, has been substituted as a proper party.