Opinion
4024-22
11-21-2022
ANNE M. GRAY, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Elizabeth A. Copeland, Judge
This case is scheduled for trial at the Trial Session of the Court at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on February 13, 2023.
Background
In the Petition, filed March 7, 2022, petitioner alleged inter alia that she is entitled to relief from joint and several liability with her now-deceased husband, William G. Gray, for deficiencies and penalties that respondent determined with respect to the Grays' joint income tax returns for tax years 2007, 2008, and 2009. The Petition did not allege when or where Mr. Gray died, nor the identity of any fiduciary for his estate, nor the identities of any of Mr. Gray's heirs or beneficiaries.
On May 2, 2022, respondent filed a Notice of Filing of Petition and Right to Intervene, informing the Court that he could not provide notice of petitioner's claim, as required by Rule 325, in light of the Petition's omission of information regarding Mr. Gray's death, estate, and heirs or beneficiaries.
On November 17, 2022, respondent filed a Status Report informing the Court that respondent received a letter from petitioner on November 16, 2022. According to respondent, petitioner's letter indicated that Mr. Gray died intestate on September 1, 2014, as a resident of New Jersey; that no fiduciary was appointed to act for his estate; that petitioner is his surviving spouse; and that Mr. Gray had four children (whose names are listed in the letter). According to respondent, petitioner asserted in the letter that there is no further action required with respect to notifying any parties of a right to intervene in this action. Respondent noted his disagreement with that conclusion.
Discussion
When a taxpayer submits a petition seeking "innocent spouse" relief under section 6015, this Court's Rules require respondent to serve notice on the non-requesting spouse within 60 days of service of the petition, informing such non-requesting spouse of the right to intervene. Rule 325; see also King v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 118, 124-25 (2000) (clarifying that the notice requirement of Rule 325 applies both when the petition contests respondent's previous denial of section 6015 relief and when the petition newly raises section 6015 as a defense to a deficiency determination).
We have held that the non-requesting spouse's rights to notice and intervention survive his death and pass to the fiduciary of his estate, or in some cases to his heirs or beneficiaries. Fain v. Commissioner, 129 T.C. 89, 90-91 (2007). In cases where neither petitioner nor respondent is aware of the identity (if any) of the non-requesting spouse's estate's fiduciary or beneficiaries, our practice has been to require both parties
to furnish the Tax Court, insofar as ascertainable and to the best of their abilities, the names and addresses of the heirs at law of the decedent, under the law of the jurisdiction wherein the decedent was a resident when his death occurred . . . .Fain, 129 T.C. at 92 (quoting Nordstrom v. Commissioner, 50 T.C. 30, 32 (1968)).
In this case, respondent has already represented that he does not know the names and addresses of all of Mr. Gray's heirs under the intestacy laws of New Jersey. Furthermore, respondent has represented that petitioner is in the best position to find and disclose that information. We will therefore order petitioner to either object to respondent's representation regarding her superior position with respect to the Rule 325 information, or to provide the Court with such information to the best of her ability within 30 days.
Upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that by December 20, 2022, petitioner file a Notice of Heirs at Law containing the names and addresses of all known living heirs of William G. Gray under the intestacy laws of New Jersey or, in the alternative, file a motion explaining why respondent is in a better position to obtain this information.