Erroneously claimed single status does not foreclose switching to a joint return: The definition of a 'separate return' subject to a Sec. 6013(b) election and its limitations extends only to married-filing-separately status, the Tax Court holds.

Author:Meade, Janet A.
 
FREE EXCERPT

The Tax Court, reversing its holding in prior cases and following two earlier circuit court decisions, held that rules barring married taxpayers from changing their filing status from separate to joint do not extend to a return originally filed as single but later switched to joint.

Facts: The petitioners, Fansu Camara and Aminata Jatta, were married during all relevant years. On April 15, 2013, Camara erroneously filed his 2012 income tax return electing single status; Jatta did not then file a return for that year. In a notice of deficiency to Camara issued on Feb. 10, 2015, the IRS changed his filing status from single to married filing separately. On May 8, 2015, Camara and his wife petitioned the Tax Court with respect to the notice. On May 27, 2016, Camara and his wife filed a joint return for 2012.

Issues: Sec. 6013(b)(1) allows married taxpayers who could have filed a joint return for a tax year but who instead file "a separate return" to elect to switch to a joint return with their spouse for that tax year. Sec. 6013(b)(2), however, lists four limitations on this election, including barring the election from being made three or more years after the unextended filing deadline of the return. Another limitation bars the election from being made after the IRS mails either spouse a notice of deficiency and that notice is subsequently the cause of a timely filed petition with the Tax Court.

The IRS conceded that Camara and his wife otherwise met the substantive requirements to have filed a joint return for 2012 and that the joint return they filed on May 27, 2016, with several agreed-upon changes, correctly reflected their 2012 tax liability. Hie IRS contended, however, that Camaras original 2012 single return was a separate return and that the couple were procedurally barred under Sec. 6013(b)(2) from the benefits of joint status because their joint return was filed both (1) more than three years after Camara filed a separate return, and (2) after Camara had received a notice of deficiency and petitioned the...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP