Page 349 - JoFA_2022

TAX MATTERS

DelPonte’s behalf without telling her.
In 2010, upon learning about the tax
deficiency asserted against her and the
petitions filed on her behalf by Goddard,
DelPonte ratified those petitions.
The Office of Chief Counsel (OCC)
asked the IRS’s Cincinnati Centralized
Innocent Spouse Operation (CCISO)
for a recommendation on whether
DelPonte was eligible for Sec. 6015(c)
relief, and CCISO found her eligible.
The Chief Counsel, however, did not ac-
cept CCISO’s determination and invited
DelPonte to an informal discovery
conference (a so-called Branerton confer-
ence, after Branerton Corp., 61 T.C. 691
(1974)) to request additional informa-
tion. DelPonte refused to provide the
information and filed a motion with the
Tax Court for an entry of decision.
Issues: The question at issue was
whether, in cases where innocent-spouse
relief is raised as an affirmative defense
for the first time in a deficiency proceed-
Tax Court: IRS authority to concede or settle the issue, ing, the IRS Chief Counsel has final
counsel may reject the court held. authority to concede or settle the issue
Facts: The underlying tax dispute in
administrative innocent- the case dated back to the late 1990s, with the taxpayer.
Married couples have the option to
spouse approval when Michelle DelPonte was married file a joint return under Sec. 6013(a).
to William Goddard. Goddard, a lawyer, However, each spouse is jointly and
In denying relief, the court sold aggressive tax-avoidance strategies severally liable for any tax due. Sec.
finds that the Office of Chief and used some of those same strategies 6015 allows a spouse relief from joint-
Counsel’s litigating position is to shelter the considerable income he and-several liability in certain limited
independent of its request for a earned. Beginning in 2004, the IRS situations. Requesting spouses can seek
determination by a specialized issued Goddard and DelPonte five three types of relief. Under one type, Sec.
unit. notices of deficiency for tax years 1999, 6015(c) requires the requesting spouse
2000, and 2001. However, the couple to be legally separated or divorced from
By P. Jeffrey Christakos, CPA, and
had separated in 2000, and DelPonte the nonrequesting spouse at the time of
Maria M. Pirrone, CPA, LL.M.
was unaware of the notices because they electing its provisions and to have no
Although the IRS’s primary administra- were sent to Goddard’s law office. The actual knowledge of any items giving
tive unit for evaluating innocent-spouse nearly $5 million underlying tax liability rise to a deficiency not allocable to the
requests concluded that a taxpayer was was upheld in earlier proceedings (see requesting spouse at the time he or she
entitled to relief under Sec. 6015(c), Greenberg, T.C. Memo. 2018-74, signed the return. Alternatively, the
the Service was not bound by that aff ’d, 10 F.4th 1136 (11th Cir. 2021), requesting spouse may establish that he IMAGES BY ILLUSTRATOR DE LA MONDE/GETTYIMAGES
determination in litigation, the Tax and Goddard, No. 20-73023 (9th Cir. or she signed under duress.
Court held. Rather, when an innocent- 12/17/21)). Under Sec. 7803, the IRS commis-
spouse request is raised as an affirmative As part of his response to the notices sioner has broad powers to “administer,
defense in a deficiency proceeding, of deficiency, Goddard filed innocent- manage, conduct, direct and supervise
the IRS Chief Counsel has the final spouse relief petitions in Tax Court on the execution and application of internal

32 | Journal of Accountancy August 2022