Abused Spouse Can Seek Relief from Income Taxes

In Rev. Proc. 2013-34, 2013-42 IRB the Internal Revenue Service has issued new guidance and streamlined procedures for spouses who are seeking equitable relief from joint income tax liability especially where the spouse has been abuse.

Background

Section 6013(d)(3) provides that married taxpayers who file a joint return under section 6013 will be jointly and severally liable for the income tax, penalties and interest arising from that joint return. Section 6015, provides relief in certain circumstances from the joint and several liability imposed by section 6013(d)(3). Section 6015(b) and (c) specify two sets of circumstances under which relief from joint and several liability is available in cases involving understatements of tax. Section 6015(b) is modeled after former section 6013(e), the prior innocent spouse statute, and section 6015(c) provides for separation of liability for taxpayers who are no longer married to, are legally separated from, or not living together with the person with whom they filed a joint return.

If relief is not available under section 6015(b) or (c), section 6015(f) authorizes the Secretary to grant equitable relief if, taking into account all the facts and circumstances, the Secretary determines that it is inequitable to hold a requesting spouse liable for any unpaid tax or any deficiency (or any portion of either).

Section 66(c) provides relief from income tax liability resulting from the operation of community property law to taxpayers domiciled in a community property state who do not file a joint return. Section 3201(b) of the RRA amended section 66(c) to add an equitable relief provision similar to section 6015(f).

Section 6015 provides relief only from joint and several liability arising from a joint return. If an individual signs a joint return under duress, the election to file jointly is not valid and there is no valid return with respect to the requesting spouse.

Under section 6015(b) and (c), relief is available only from an understatement or a deficiency. Section 6015(b) and (c) do not authorize relief from an underpayment of income tax reported on a joint return. Section 66(c) and section 6015(f) permit equitable relief from an underpayment of income tax or from a deficiency. The legislative history of section 6015 provides that Congress intended for the Secretary to exercise discretion in granting equitable relief from an underpayment of income tax if a requesting spouse “does not know, and had no reason to know, that funds intended for the payment of tax were instead taken by the other spouse for such other spouse's benefit.” Congress also intended for the Secretary to exercise the equitable relief authority under section 6015(f) in other situations if, “taking into account all the facts and circumstances, it is inequitable to hold an individual liable for all or part of any unpaid tax or deficiency arising from a joint return.”

Significant Changes

Rev. Proc. 2013-34 gives greater deference to the presence of spousal abuse. The Service recognizes that the issue of spousal abuse can be relevant with respect to the analysis of other factors and can negate the presence of certain factors. This change is intended to give greater weight to the presence of spousal abuse when its presence impacts the analysis of other factors.

The timeliness threshold condition provides that a request for equitable relief under section 6015(f) or section 66(c) must be filed before the expiration of the period of limitation for collection under section 6502 to the extent the taxpayer seeks relief from an outstanding liability, or before the expiration of the period of limitation for credit or refund under section 6511 to the extent the taxpayer seeks a refund of taxes paid. This is a significant change from prior requirements. The attribution threshold condition adds a new exception in paragraph (e) to the requirement that the income tax liability must be attributable to an item of the nonrequesting spouse. Under the Rev. Proc. relief would not be precluded for an item attributable to the requesting spouse if the nonrequesting spouse's fraud gave rise to the understatement of tax or deficiency.

Streamlined determinations will now apply to understatements of income tax instead of only underpayments and also now applies to claims for equitable relief under section 66(c).

The Rev. Proc. clarifies that no one factor or a majority of factors necessarily controls the determination.

The economic hardship factor now provides minimum standards based on income, expenses, and assets, for determining whether the requesting spouse would suffer economic hardship if relief is not granted. The Rev. Proc. also now provides that the lack of a finding of economic hardship does not weigh against relief.

The knowledge factor for understatement cases clarifies how the factor works in cases involving equitable relief under section 66(c), in addition to cases involving equitable relief under section 6015(f). Further, the Rev. Proc. clarifies that, for purposes of this factor, if the nonrequesting spouse abused the requesting spouse or maintained control over the household finances by restricting the requesting spouse's access to financial information, and because of the abuse or financial control, the requesting spouse was not able to challenge the treatment of any items on the joint return for fear of the nonrequesting spouse's retaliation, then that abuse or financial control will result in this factor weighing in favor of relief even if the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know of the items giving rise to the understatement or deficiency.

The knowledge factor for underpayment cases now provides that, in determining whether the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know that the nonrequesting spouse would not pay the tax reported as due on the return, the Service will consider whether the requesting spouse reasonably expected that the nonrequesting spouse would pay the tax liability at the time the return was filed or within a reasonable period of time after the filing of the return. The Rev. Proc. provides that a requesting spouse may be presumed to have reasonably expected that the nonrequesting spouse would pay the liability if a request for an installment agreement to pay the tax was filed by the later of 90 days after the due date for payment of the tax, or 90 days after the return was filed. Further, the Rev. Proc. clarifies that for purposes of this factor, if the nonrequesting spouse abused the requesting spouse or maintained control over the household finances by restricting the requesting spouse's access to financial information, and because of the abuse or financial control, the requesting spouse was not able to question the payment of the taxes reported as due on the return or challenge the nonrequesting spouse's assurance regarding payment of the taxes for fear of the nonrequesting spouse's retaliation, then that abuse or financial control will result in this factor weighing in favor of relief even if the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know that the nonrequesting spouse would not pay the tax liability. Finally, the Rev. Proc. provides that if the requesting spouse did not reasonably expect that the nonrequesting spouse would pay the tax liability reported on an amended return that was based on items not properly reported on the original return, the Service will also consider whether the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know of the understatement on the original return.

The legal obligation factor clarifies that a requesting spouse's legal obligation to pay outstanding tax liabilities is a factor to consider in determining whether equitable relief should be granted, in addition to whether the nonrequesting spouse has a legal obligation to pay the tax liabilities.

The significant benefit factor provides that any significant benefit a requesting spouse may have received from the unpaid tax or understatement will not weigh against relief (will be neutral) if the nonrequesting spouse abused the requesting spouse or maintained financial control and made the decisions regarding living a more lavish lifestyle. Further, the Rev Proc. provides that if only the nonrequesting spouse significantly benefitted from the unpaid tax or understatement, and the requesting spouse had little or no benefit, or the nonrequesting spouse enjoyed the benefit to the requesting spouse's detriment, this factor will weigh in favor of relief. The Rev. Proc. also provides that if the amount of unpaid tax or understatement of tax was small such that neither spouse received a significant benefit, then this factor is neutral.

The compliance with the income tax laws factor now provides that a requesting spouse's subsequent compliance with all Federal income tax laws is a factor that may weigh in favor of relief, instead of always being neutral.

Rev. Proc. 2013-34 broadens the availability of refunds in cases involving deficiencies by eliminating the rule that limited refunds in cases involving deficiencies to payments made by the requesting spouse pursuant to an installment agreement.

 General Conditions for Relief

Eligibility for equitable relief. A requesting spouse must satisfy all of the following threshold conditions to be eligible to submit a request for equitable relief under section 6015(f). With the exception of conditions (1) and (2), a requesting spouse must satisfy all of the following threshold conditions to be eligible to submit a request for equitable relief under section 66(c). The Service may relieve a requesting spouse who satisfies all the applicable threshold conditions set forth below of all or part of the income tax liability under section 66(c) or section 6015(f) if, taking into account all the facts and circumstances, the Service determines that it would be inequitable to hold the requesting spouse liable for the income tax liability. The threshold conditions are as follows:

(1) The requesting spouse filed a joint return for the taxable year for which he or she seeks relief.

(2) Relief is not available to the requesting spouse under section 6015(b) or (c).

(3) The claim for relief is timely filed:

(4) No assets were transferred between the spouses as part of a fraudulent scheme by the spouses.

(5) The nonrequesting spouse did not transfer disqualified assets to the requesting spouse. For this purpose,

(6) The requesting spouse did not knowingly participate in the filing of a fraudulent joint return.

(7) The income tax liability from which the requesting spouse seeks relief is attributable (either in full or in part) to an item of the nonrequesting spouse or an underpayment resulting from the nonrequesting spouse's income. If the liability is partially attributable to the requesting spouse, then relief can only be considered for the portion of the liability attributable to the nonrequesting spouse.

(a) Attribution solely due to the operation of community property law. If an item is attributable or partially attributable to the requesting spouse solely due to the operation of community property law, then that item (or portion thereof) will be considered to be attributable to the nonrequesting spouse.

(b) Nominal ownership. If the item is titled in the name of the requesting spouse, the item is presumptively attributable to the requesting spouse.

(c) Misappropriation of funds. If the requesting spouse did not know, and had no reason to know, that funds intended for the payment of tax were misappropriated by the nonrequesting spouse for the nonrequesting spouse's benefit, the Service will consider granting equitable relief although the underpayment may be attributable in part or in full to an item of the requesting spouse. The Service will consider granting relief in this case only to the extent that the funds intended for the payment of tax were taken by the nonrequesting spouse.

(d) Abuse. If the requesting spouse establishes that he or she was the victim of abuse prior to the time the return was filed, and that, as a result of the prior abuse, the requesting spouse was not able to challenge the treatment of any items on the return, or was not able to question the payment of any balance due reported on the return, for fear of the nonrequesting spouse's retaliation, the Service will consider granting equitable relief even though the deficiency or underpayment may be attributable in part or in full to an item of the requesting spouse.

(e) Fraud committed by nonrequesting spouse. The Service will consider granting relief notwithstanding that the item giving rise to the understatement or deficiency is attributable to the requesting spouse, if the requesting spouse establishes that the nonrequesting spouse's fraud is the reason for the erroneous item.

Streamlined Determinations

Under Rev. Proc. 2013-34 there are circumstances under which the Service will make streamlined determinations granting equitable relief under sections 66(c) and 6015(f).

If a requesting spouse who filed a joint return, or a requesting spouse who did not file a joint return in a community property state, satisfies the threshold conditions the Service will consider whether the requesting spouse is entitled to a streamlined determination of equitable relief under section 66(c) or section 6015(f). If a requesting spouse is not entitled to a streamlined determination because the requesting spouse does not satisfy all the elements the requesting spouse is still entitled to be considered for relief under the equitable factors. The Service will make streamlined determinations granting equitable relief under section 66(c) or section 6015(f), in cases in which the requesting spouse establishes that the requesting spouse:

(1) Marital status. The requesting spouse is no longer married to the nonrequesting spouse.

(2) Economic hardship. The requesting spouse would suffer economic hardship if relief were not granted.

(3) Knowledge or reason to know.

(a)  Did the requesting spouse not know or have reason to know that there was an understatement or deficiency on the joint income tax return, or did not know or have reason to know that the nonrequesting spouse would not or could not pay the underpayment of tax reported on the joint income tax return, If the nonrequesting spouse abused the requesting spouse or maintained control over the household finances by restricting the requesting spouse's access to financial information, and because of the abuse or financial control, the requesting spouse was not able to challenge the treatment of any items on the joint return, or to question the payment of the taxes reported as due on the joint return or challenge the nonrequesting spouse's assurance regarding payment of the taxes, for fear of the nonrequesting spouse's retaliation, then the abuse or financial control will result in this factor being satisfied even if the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know of the items giving rise to the understatement or deficiency or knew or had reason to know that the nonrequesting spouse would not pay the tax liability.

(b)  Section 66(c) cases. Did the requesting spouse not know or have reason to know of an item of community income properly includible in gross income, which, under the rules contained in section 879(a), would be treated as the income of the nonrequesting spouse.

Factors for determining whether to grant equitable relief.

Applicability. Rev. Proc. 2013-34 applies to a requesting spouse who requests relief under section 66(c) or section 6015(f), and who satisfies the threshold conditions, but does not qualify for streamlined determinations granting relief.

Factors. In determining whether it is inequitable to hold the requesting spouse liable for all or part of the unpaid income tax liability or deficiency, and whether full or partial equitable relief under section 66(c) or section 6015(f) should be granted, all the facts and circumstances of the case are to be taken into account. The factors listed below are designed as guides and not intended to comprise an exclusive list. Other factors relevant to a specific claim for relief may also be taken into account in making the determination. In evaluating a claim for relief, no one factor or a majority of factors necessarily determines the outcome. The degree of importance of each factor varies depending on the requesting spouse's facts and circumstances. Abuse or the exercise of financial control by the nonrequesting spouse is a factor that may impact the other factors, as described below. Factors to consider include the following:

(a) Marital status. Whether the requesting spouse is no longer married to the nonrequesting spouse as of the date the Service makes its determination. If the requesting spouse is still married to the nonrequesting spouse, this factor is neutral. If the requesting spouse is no longer married to the nonrequesting spouse, this factor will weigh in favor of relief. For purposes of this section, a requesting spouse will be treated as being no longer married to the nonrequesting spouse only in the following situations:

(i) The requesting spouse is divorced from the nonrequesting spouse,

(ii) The requesting spouse is legally separated from the nonrequesting spouse under applicable state law,

(iii) The requesting spouse is a widow or widower and is not an heir to the nonrequesting spouse's estate that would have sufficient assets to pay the tax liability, or

(iv) The requesting spouse has not been a member of the same household as the nonrequesting spouse at any time during the 12-month period ending on the date the Service makes its determination.

(b) Economic hardship. Whether the requesting spouse will suffer economic hardship if relief is not granted. The Service will take into consideration a requesting spouse's current income and expenses and the requesting spouse's assets.

In determining whether the requesting spouse would suffer economic hardship if relief is not granted, the Service will compare the requesting spouse's income to the Federal poverty guidelines for the requesting spouse's family size and will determine by how much, if at all, the requesting spouse's monthly income exceeds the spouse's reasonable basic monthly living expenses.

(c) Knowledge or reason to know.

(i) Understatement cases.

(A) Section 6015(f) cases. Whether the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know of the item giving rise to the understatement or deficiency as of the date the joint return (including a joint amended return) was filed, or the date the requesting spouse reasonably believed the joint return was filed. If the requesting spouse did not know and had no reason to know of the item giving rise to the understatement, this factor will weigh in favor of relief. If the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know of the item giving rise to the understatement, this factor will weigh against relief.

(B) Section 66(c) cases. Whether the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know of an item of community income properly includible in gross income would be treated as the income of the nonrequesting spouse.

(ii) Underpayment cases. In the case of an income tax liability that was properly reported but not paid, whether, as of the date the return was filed or the date the requesting spouse reasonably believed the return was filed, the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know that the nonrequesting spouse would not or could not pay the tax liability at that time or within a reasonable period of time after the filing of the return.

Depending on the facts and circumstances, if the requesting spouse was abused by the nonrequesting spouse or the nonrequesting spouse maintained control of the household finances by restricting the requesting spouse's access to financial information, and because of the abuse or financial control, the requesting spouse was not able to question the payment of the taxes reported as due on the return or challenge the nonrequesting spouse's assurance regarding payment of the taxes for fear of the nonrequesting spouse's retaliation, this factor will weigh in favor of relief even if the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know about the nonrequesting spouse's intent or ability to pay the taxes due.

With respect to an underpayment of tax on an amended return that reports a liability based on items not properly reported on the original return, the initial inquiry is whether, as of the date the amended return was filed, or the date the requesting spouse reasonably believed the amended return was filed, the requesting spouse reasonably expected that the nonrequesting spouse would pay the tax within a reasonable period of time.

(iii) Reason to know. The facts and circumstances that are considered in determining whether the requesting spouse had reason to know of an understatement, or reason to know whether the nonrequesting spouse could or would pay the reported tax liability, include, but are not limited to, the requesting spouse's level of education, any deceit or evasiveness of the nonrequesting spouse, the requesting spouse's degree of involvement in the activity generating the income tax liability, the requesting spouse's involvement in business or household financial matters, the requesting spouse's business or financial expertise, and any lavish or unusual expenditures compared with past spending levels.

(iv) Abuse by the nonrequesting spouse. For purposes of this revenue procedure, if the requesting spouse establishes that he or she was the victim of abuse then depending on the facts and circumstances of the requesting spouse's situation, the abuse may result in certain factors weighing in favor of relief when otherwise the factor may have weighed against relief. Abuse comes in many forms and can include physical, psychological, sexual, or emotional abuse, including efforts to control, isolate, humiliate, and intimidate the requesting spouse, or to undermine the requesting spouse's ability to reason independently and be able to do what is required under the tax laws. All the facts and circumstances are considered in determining whether a requesting spouse was abused. The impact of a nonrequesting spouse's alcohol or drug abuse is also considered in determining whether a requesting spouse was abused. Depending on the facts and circumstances, abuse of the requesting spouse's child or other family member living in the household may constitute abuse of the requesting spouse.

(d) Legal obligation. Whether the requesting spouse or the nonrequesting spouse has a legal obligation to pay the outstanding Federal income tax liability. For purposes of this factor, a legal obligation is an obligation arising from a divorce decree or other legally binding agreement. This factor will weigh in favor of relief if the nonrequesting spouse has the sole legal obligation to pay the outstanding income tax liability pursuant to a divorce decree or agreement. This factor, however, will be neutral if the requesting spouse knew or had reason to know, when entering into the divorce decree or agreement, that the nonrequesting spouse would not pay the income tax liability. This factor will weigh against relief if the requesting spouse has the sole legal obligation. The fact that the nonrequesting spouse has been relieved of liability for the taxes at issue as a result of a discharge in bankruptcy is disregarded in determining whether the requesting spouse has the sole legal obligation. This factor will be neutral if, based on an agreement or consent order, both spouses have a legal obligation to pay the outstanding income tax liability, the spouses are not separated or divorced, or the divorce decree or agreement is silent as to any obligation to pay the outstanding income tax liability.

(e) Significant benefit. Whether the requesting spouse significantly benefited from the unpaid income tax liability or understatement.

(f) Compliance with income tax laws. Whether the requesting spouse has made a good faith effort to comply with the income tax laws in the taxable years following the taxable year or years to which the request for relief relates.

Refunds. In both understatement and underpayment cases, a requesting spouse is eligible for a refund of separate payments made by the requesting spouse after July 22, 1998, if the requesting spouse establishes that the funds used to make the payment for which a refund is sought were provided by the requesting spouse. A requesting spouse is not eligible for refunds of payments made with the joint return, joint payments, or payments that the nonrequesting spouse made. A requesting spouse, however, may be eligible for a refund of the requesting spouse's portion of the requesting and nonrequesting spouse's joint overpayment from another tax year that was applied to the joint income tax liability to the extent that the requesting spouse can establish that the requesting spouse provided the funds for the overpayment. The availability of refunds is subject to the refund limitations of section 6511.

Procedure

A requesting spouse seeking equitable relief under section 66(c) or section 6015(f) must file Form 8857, Request for Innocent Spouse Relief (and Separation of Liability, and Equitable Relief), or other similar statement signed under penalties of perjury, within the applicable period of limitation.