I didn't know #1

[jainen]

Rodriguez v. U.S., DC TX, 111 AFTR 2d 2013-793

Taxpayer was denied claim to itemize deductions for years for which his wife filed separate return claiming standard deduction. Apparently wife filed first.

--------

For tax years 2003 and 2005, Plaintiff sought to itemize his deductions. For each of those two tax years, Plaintiff's wife filed a separate tax return on which she elected the Standard Deduction. Where a taxpayer's spouse has elected the Standard Deduction, a taxpayer is not allowed to itemize deductions unless:

• ((A)) the spouse makes a change of election with respect to itemized deductions, for the taxable year covered in such separate return, consistent with the change of treatment sought by the taxpayer, and
• ((B )) the taxpayer and his spouse consent in writing to the assessment (within such period as may be agreed on with the Secretary) of any deficiency, to the extent attributable to such change of election, even though at the time of the filing of such consent the assessment of such deficiency would otherwise be prevented by the operation of any law or rule of law.

26 U.S.C. § 63(e)(3). In this case, Plaintiff states that his wife's election of the Standard Deduction for tax years 2003 and 2005 was a mistake. Plaintiff has provided no evidence, however, that his spouse changed her election for the Standard Deduction for either tax year 2003 or 2005, or that she consented in writing to the assessment of any resulting delinquency. As a result, Plaintiff is not entitled to itemize deductions for tax years 2003 and 2005.

[Jack from Ohio]

Tax Court case, Rodriguez v. U.S., DC TX, 111 AFTR 2d ¶2013-793

Taxpayer was denied claim to itemize deductions for years for which his wife filed separate return claiming standard deduction. Apparently wife filed first.

Ok jainen, post the content. The link takes you to a login page. You have to be subscribed to Thompson Rueters to access it, and I am not.

I really want to see this one.

[jainen]

>>link takes you to a login page<<

Sorry. You must have been online when I posted, so I didn't have time to check for and fix the smilies and broken links.

Note that it wasn't tax court. I don't know why he paid to go to District Court, but they slammed him on everything. His disabled adult daughter lived with him, so he tried to deduct room rental expenses, elderly & disabled credit, EIC, CTC, as well as energy credits and SE business expenses. I guess he filed MFS late, and it covered several years. Talk about red flags--this guy looks like a matador! Along the way IRS lost some records but the court said record-keeping is the taxpayer's responsibility. Great read!

[Guest Taxed]

Was this a self prepared tax return?

Those MFS are dangerous if the spouses are NOT communicating!