Divorced, but have tax issues

[LdiJ]

The checks were signed and given to the lawyer to put into an escrow account until they could be divided up. She eventually got 66%, I got 34% of the refund.

Yes we both signed the checks. Yes neither one of us verified the amount on the check with the tax return. We just signed the checks and turned them over to the lawyer.

Well, then morally I would consider her to be responsible for 66% of the extra money.

However, that is not how the IRS looks at it. The IRS considers you both to be responsible for 100% of it, and will (as they did) take it from wherever they can get it.

I am not sure whether you have any legal mechanism to collect from her now. You can try re-opening the property settlement, but to be honest, the judge doesn't have any autority to order her to sign the amended state returns. The judge still may order her to do so, and she may comply, but technically the judge does NOT have the authority to order her to do so.

However, as an object lesson to anyone else reading this thread...if the IRS sends you a bigger refund than you were expecting, do NOT spend it until you verify that it actually belongs to you. Under the law, you are not even supposed to cash the check in that situation.

If you had handled the extra refund properly in the first place, you wouldn't be in the position that you are in now.

 

[yerbudi]

LdiJ,

Let's be honest, she has no morals, or I wouldn't be on here in the first place picking your brain!

Wouldn't the IRS portion fall under:

2. Each party hereby agrees to idemnify the other with respect to misrepresentations made by that party as to Federal and State Income Tax returns, past, present and future resulting in any liability, loss, charges, or expenses to the other. Said indemnification shall include reasonable costs for attorney's fees and accountant's fees.

And even if the Judge cannot order her to sign the amended state returns, she would just be a fool for not signing and getting half of what is owed to us.

 

[LdiJ]

LdiJ,

Let's be honest, she has no morals, or I wouldn't be on here in the first place picking your brain!

Wouldn't the IRS portion fall under:

2. Each party hereby agrees to idemnify the other with respect to misrepresentations made by that party as to Federal and State Income Tax returns, past, present and future resulting in any liability, loss, charges, or expenses to the other. Said indemnification shall include reasonable costs for attorney's fees and accountant's fees.

And even if the Judge cannot order her to sign the amended state returns, she would just be a fool for not signing and getting half of what is owed to us.

No, because that is not what that means. What that means is that if the IRS audits a past joint tax return, and discovers that one of you seriously cheated on your portion of income or deductions, that you agree that the other is not responsible for your cheating.

This isn't a misrepresentation that was discovered in an audit. This is something that both of you should have known (or at least the person who handled the tax return should have known) from the get go.

I agree that she would be a fool not to sign the amended state returns, assuming that the amendment is valid and assuming that you are not intending to keep her share to cover her share of the excess federal refund.

I could see her refusing to sign them if she was uncertain that the amendment was valid, and I could see her refusing to sign them if she thought you were intending to keep the entire additional refund.