IRM 25.15.19 provides guidance for resolving taxpayer issues when the Form 8857 , Request for Innocent Spouse Relief, does not qualify for consideration, yet the taxpayer has other account issues which require resolution.

CCISO specialists process taxpayer requests that do not qualify for innocent spouse relief under IRC 6015 or IRC 66(c), but require account corrections.

IRM 25.15.18.5.1.11 lists conditions that cause a request to be non-qualifying, which means the request cannot be considered. Also see IRM 25.15.3.6, Special Considerations, for additional information on non-qualifying conditions.

The specialists follow the procedures in IRM 25.15.18.5.1.11, Non-Qualifying Requests, to close the request for relief.

The specialists follow the procedures in this IRM to correct accounts when needed.

IRC 66(c), Spouse Relieved of Liability in Certain Other Cases.

The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 26 CFR sections 1.66-1 through -5, contains guidance on requests for relief from federal income tax liability resulting from the operation of community property law.

IRC 6015, Relief from joint and several liability on joint return.

26 CFR sections 1.6015-1 through -9, and related proposed regulations, including 78 FR 49242 (issued on August 13, 2013) and 80 FR 72649-01 (issued November 20, 2015). These regulations provide guidance on requests for relief from joint and several liability.

Rev. Proc. 2013-34, guidelines for taxpayers seeking equitable relief from income tax liability under section 66(c) or section 6015(f).

The Director, Examination - Field and Campus Policy, reports to the Director, Headquarters Examination, and is responsible for the delivery of policy and guidance that impacts the field and campus examination process. See IRM 1.1.16.3.5.1, Field and Campus Policy, for additional information.

Campus Exam and Field Support, which is under the Director, Examination - Field and Campus Policy, is the group responsible for providing Servicewide policy guidance on compliance processes that relate to campus examination operations and support Field Exam and Specialty Programs in SB/SE and Large Business & International (LB&I). See IRM 1.1.16.3.5.1.5, Campus Exam and Field Support, for additional information.

CCISO falls under the responsibility of the Director, Examination - Campus, with the Director, Examination - Field and Campus Policy, providing oversight to the innocent spouse processing IRMs.

The IRS adopted the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TBOR) in June 2014. Employees are responsible for being familiar with and acting in accordance with taxpayer rights. See IRC 7803(a)(3), Execution of Duties in Accord with Taxpayer Rights. For additional information about the TBOR, see the web page Taxpayer Bill of Rights FAQs.

Management in CCISO oversees employees processing Forms 8857, including creating and updating the Innocent Spouse Tracking System (ISTS) records, creating and maintaining cases on the Accounts Management System (AMS)/Innocent Spouse Application (ISA) Database, and making account adjustments needed to resolve complex account issues, when requests for relief are non-qualifying. Management uses reports generated through IDRS, ISTS and AMS to account for cases within the operation, and measure program effectiveness.

Policy does program reviews periodically on CCISO to evaluate whether case procedures comply with the IRM and to do risk analysis. Operational reviews are conducted periodically by Director, Examination - Campus.

The following is a list of common terms used in this IRM section:

The following table lists commonly used acronyms and their definitions used throughout this IRM:

The table below includes references for related Internal Revenue Manuals (IRMs).

Specific freeze codes require extra consideration before processing a request for relief. This section identifies some of the codes that require consideration.

≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡

≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡

≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡

≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡

Instructions to work erroneous refunds can be found in IRM 21.4.5, Erroneous Refunds.

An erroneous refund is the receipt of money from the IRS to which the recipient is not entitled. Examples of erroneous refunds are:

This section of the IRM provides guidance to resolve invalidated joint returns.

There are three situations where a joint return is invalid:

Individuals who allege that their spouse forged an electronic return or signed a paper return on their behalf may not be true forgery cases, provided there is tacit consent. The individual, in the course of the relationship, provided their personal information to their spouse. Requests for relief involving a RS who alleges the other spouse forged their signature should be considered under IRM 25.15.19.2.4.1, Tacit Consent Factors, IRM 25.15.19.2.4.2, Determining if a Joint Election is Valid, and IRM 25.15.19.2.4.3, Joint Election is Invalid, but not IRM 25.15.19.2.5.1, Forgery with Elements of Fraud.

The burden of proof is on the taxpayer to prove forgery and no intent to file a joint return.

There is a distinction between alleged forgery between two spouses and forgery with criminal intent, described below.

Unlawful returns are returns filed when the taxpayers were not legally married at the end of the tax year, but both parties willingly filed using the joint filing status. This distinguishes these types of returns from invalid joint election returns.

Obtain the following information if available:

Once established that the return is unlawful, tax returns showing an underpayment can be allocated between the two taxpayers and adjusted. Refund returns should not be adjusted, only subsequent assessments. Allocate subsequent assessment items between the two taxpayers.

Married taxpayers who live in community property states report income based on state law. If separate returns are filed each spouse reports 50% of the total community property income regardless of which spouse acquired the income. In addition, each spouse is taxed on 100% of their separate property income. If the taxpayers filed a joint return, then relief under IRC 66(c) is not an issue. See Treas. Reg. 1.66-4(a)(1)(i) for more information.

If the RS requested relief for a year for which there is no issue to consider under IRC 66(c), then non-qualify case for filing status. See IRM 25.15.18.5.1.11, Non-Qualifying Requests, for more information.

≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡

≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡

If unable to secure the administrative file: