Kathy Stolkin of California sought relief from the IRS for a tax debt from her husband’s shopaholic binges and financial irresponsibility. She filed under the “Innocent Spouse” provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. Having failed the safe harbor provisions, Ms. Stolkin pleaded to have the Tax Court apply the seven point “Balancing Test” which includes whether the petitioner was abused by the non-requesting spouse.
While it was likely a reason that she married him, Ms. Stolkin argued that her ex-husband’s financial irresponsibility constituted a form of emotional abuse. The Tax Court retorted that “nonphysical abuse will weigh in favor of relief only where it is severe enough to incapacitate a requesting spouse in the same manner he or she would be incapacitated by physical abuse.”
The Stolkins were married from 1981 to 1995. They lived a lavish lifestyle during marriage and Ms. Stolkin walked away from the bankruptcy and marriage with a $4,500 per month alimony payment, a $500,000 condo, a BMW, and a job that paid about $1,000 per month. She certainly won’t have any trouble getting her dry-cleaning done.
In spite of his generosity, no one could call Mr. Stolkin a saint. He spent beyond his income, took a premature $220,000 pension distribution, left a $54,000 marital tax debt, and hasn’t filed his taxes in 12 years. He signed divorce papers that stated he would take care of the tax debt, but he hasn’t been heard from in years. If he’s smart, he has likely expatriated by now.
What I find unique and hopeful in this case is the Tax Court’s position on emotional abuse. This is a hallmark standard of what should be applied in family court cases across the country. Non-physical abuse is the engine of fear within an intimate partner’s mind. Its consequences can be very destructive.
If the Tax Court perspective were a Family Court standard, thousands–perhaps, tens of thousands–of husbands and domestic partners would not be deemed guilty of domestic violence for the thoughts in an intimate partner’s mind. If this standard were used, the threshold for obtaining family-destroying restraining orders would be raised high enough to save families at risk of abuse from vengeful spouses.
I wish the best for Ms. Stolkin and I’m sure, with oil at over $100 per barrel, that Mr. Stolkin will have an untarnished silver spoon for some time.
If you would like to find out more about this case or about spouses who are willing to destroy a family based upon the fears in their minds, visit my web page at LiveBeatDad.com.
Penumbrook's Weblog 