DocketNumber: Docket No. 8683-15
Judges: COLVIN
Filed Date: 1/10/2017
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
Decision will be entered for respondent.
COLVIN,
This case was submitted for decision fully stipulated under On November 1, 2004, petitioner and her then husband, George Williams, filed a joint Federal income tax return for 2002. Respondent assessed the tax shown on the return as well as interest and additions to tax for failure to timely file, failure to timely pay, and failure to make estimated tax payments for 2002. Respondent did not determine or assess a deficiency for 2002. On March 24, 2007, petitioner submitted a request for relief from joint and several liability for 2002. Respondent received the request on March 26, 2007,*10 and on September 17, 2007, issued a notice of determination denying the request. Shortly thereafter, petitioner submitted additional information supporting her request. By letter dated March 11, 2009, respondent notified petitioner that respondent had not changed the determination on the basis of the additional information. *12 Petitioner's decree of divorce from George Williams was entered on March 17, 2008. On March 23, 2009, petitioner filed a petition, assigned docket No. 706209S, with regard to her 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 tax years. On June 30, 2009, this Court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that the petition was not timely filed. On her 2011 Federal income tax return petitioner reported no tax liability, a $345 withholding credit, and a $3,094 earned income tax credit. On March 12, 2012, respondent processed petitioner's 2011 tax return and applied the $3,439 overpayment against her 2002 liability. Respondent notified petitioner of this action in writing. On her 2012 Federal income tax return petitioner reported no tax liability, a $448 withholding credit, and a $3,169 earned*11 income tax credit, resulting in a claimed overpayment of $3,617. On February 25, 2013, respondent processed petitioner's 2012 return and applied $3,595.91 (of the total $3,617) of her 2012 overpayment against her 2002 liability and $21.09 (of the total $3,617) of the *13 overpayment against her 2003 liability. The same day respondent notified petitioner of that action. On March 20, 2014, petitioner submitted a Form 8857, Request for Innocent Spouse Relief, dated March 20, 2014, and postmarked March 21, 2014, for petitioner's 2002-05 tax years. Respondent received the Form 8857 on March 24, 2014. In a notice of determination dated March 4, 2015, respondent determined that petitioner is entitled to relief from joint and several liability for 2002. The notice stated that respondent would refund any payments petitioner made that were available for refund if nothing was owed on the joint income tax assessed for 2002. The notice also stated: "In addition, under On March 30, 2015, respondent issued to petitioner a refund totaling $3,829.93, comprising: (1) $3,595.91 of petitioner's overpayment for 2012 that *14 respondent had previously applied against the liability for 2002; (2) $21.09 of petitioner's overpayment for 2012 that respondent had previously applied for 2003; and (3) $212.93 of interest. On the same day, respondent also issued petitioner a refund of the $3,746 that respondent had previously applied from 2013 for 2003 and $103.31 of interest. Respondent did not issue to petitioner a refund of the $3,439 that respondent had previously applied from 2011 against the joint assessed income tax liability of petitioner and her husband for 2002 because the tax had been paid over two years before the filing of petitioner's request for relief from joint and several liability. On March 31, 2015, petitioner filed the petition in this case, seeking a refund of the $3,439 that respondent had previously applied from 2011 against the 2002 liability. Spouses filing a joint Federal income tax return are jointly and severally liable for*13 all taxes due. We agree with respondent that For the refund claim for 2002, the date of payment for Petitioner, in essence, requests relief from the periods of limitation based on sympathy for her personal circumstances. However, periods of limitation are not subject to waiver based on sympathy for personal circumstances. Thus, we sustain respondent's determination. To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered for respondent.
1. Section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all relevant times. Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.↩