Source: https://www.carnahanlaw.com/courts-continue-inconsistent-decisions-as-to-validity-of-irs-regulation-on-requesting-innocent-spouse-relief/
Timestamp: 2019-09-18 12:10:23
Document Index: 43536513

Matched Legal Cases: ['§\u20091', '§\u20096015', '§\u20091', '§ 6015', '§\u20096015', '§\u20096015', '§\u20091', '§\u20096015', '§\u20096015', '§\u20096015', '§\u20096015', '§\u2009301']

Courts continue inconsistent decisions as to validity of IRS regulation on requesting innocent spouse relief - carnahanlaw
Reg. § 1.6015-5(b)(1) requires that a spouse must request equitable relief under Code § 6015(f) no later than two years from the first collection activity against the spouse.
A divided Tax Court invalidated Reg. § 1.6015-5(b)(1), which required taxpayers seeking equitable innocent spouse relief under I.R.C. § 6015(f) to request such relief within two years of the IRS’s commencement of the collection action. Lantz v. Commissioner, 132 T.C. No. 8 (Apr. 7, 2009). 4/8/09
The Third Circuit in Mannella, 107 AFTR 2d 2011-519, 2011-1 USTC ¶50159 (CA-3, 2011), reversed the Tax Court’s decision and held that the taxpayer’s innocent spouse suit under § 6015(f), filed more than two years after she was notified that the IRS was initiating collection procedures against her, was untimely under Reg 1.6015-5(b)(1). The Third Circuit remanded the case to the Tax Court to allow the taxpayer to bring an equitable tolling claim. 5/30/11
Three senators wrote to Shulman on April 18, 2011 expressing concern that [t]]he two-year limitations period on claims for equitable innocent spouse relief prevents innocent spouses from receiving the relief they deserve,” In a separate letter, 50 members of the House said that Congress did not intend to impose a two-year limitations period under Code § 6015(f).
In Jones v. Comm., CA 4, 107 AFTR 2d ¶2011-930, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the validity of Reg. § 1.6015-5(b)(1), applying 2-year deadline to Code § 6015(f) innocent spouse relief claims, and reversed and remanded the Tax Court decision to contrary, striking the regulation down and granting taxpayer’s request for Code § 6015(f) relief that taxpayer filed outside 2-year deadline The 4th Circuit found that Code § 6015(f) was sufficiently ambiguous to leave room for agency interpretation and that such interpretation, reflecting IRS determination that no deadline would create uncertainty and that instead 2-year timeline should apply, was reasonable. The Court rejected taxpayer’s arguments that regulation was unnecessarily and inappropriately narrowed the relief that Congress had intended to provide in Code § 6015(f). However, taxpayer was entitled to be heard on her alternative argument that even if regulation were valid, she should still be given time extension under Reg. § 301.9100-3, and the case was remanded for consideration of that issue.