Press ReleaseAs the saying goes, “it takes two to tango”, and the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) takes that quite literally. Under Section 6013 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, a married couple may elect to file a single federal income tax return that combines both spouses’ income, deductions, and credits. If a couple is married on the last day of the tax year, the spouses can generally elect “married filing jointly.” Most married couples make this election, and for good reason: filing jointly often results in a lower combined tax bill. It allows the couple to pool their income under wider tax brackets, which helps when one spouse earns significantly more than the other, and secures access to credits and deductions that are limited or unavailable when spouses file separately. But with great tax savings comes great responsibility, and here, that responsibility is shared.
The primary risk of filing a joint return is the doctrine of joint and several liability under Section 6013(d)(3), which generally makes each spouse fully and equally liable for the entire tax, interest, and penalties reflected on the return, even if the problem stems solely from one spouse’s unreported income, exaggerated deductions, or misconduct. As a result, the IRS may collect the full liability from either spouse’s wages, bank accounts, or assets, and in the case of a joint refund, the IRS may apply the refund to pay certain debts owed by either spouse. In addition, once a joint return has been filed, spouses generally cannot amend the return to elect “married filing separately.” Notwithstanding these risks, relief from joint and several liability may be available under Section 6015 through innocent spouse relief, separation of liability, or equitable relief. Eligibility for such relief depends heavily on the specific facts and circumstances.
In a recent decision, Jusino v. United States, 2026 U.S. Claims LEXIS 2912 (Fed. Cl. Oct. 21, 2026), the United States Court of Federal Claims held that a taxpayer’s wife was a necessary party to his joint return refund suit. The husband sought a refund after he and his wife amended their joint returns to exclude settlement proceeds that had been erroneously reported as taxable income. The government argued that the husband failed to join his wife in the suit and filed a joinder motion, asking the court to add the wife as party because she had an interest in the claimed refund. The court explained that spouses’ respective interests in a joint tax refund are based on their contributions to the tax payments, rather than whose income generated the disputed tax liability. The wife’s tax withholding gave her an interest in any resulting refund, and proceeding without her created a risk of duplicative litigation. Accordingly, the court granted the government’s motion for joinder and ordered the husband to amend his complaint to add his wife as a necessary party.
Jusino illustrates a broader point: a joint election to file ties spouses together long after the return is filed, and often long after a marriage ends. Tax liability owed during years in which the spouses filed jointly survive divorce, and a divorce decree allocating tax debts does not bind the IRS. The IRS requires that a joint return is signed by both spouses and the same applies for an amended joint return. Consider a divorced taxpayer seeking to resolve non-filing or other reporting issues through the IRS’s Voluntary Disclosure or other programs for previous years in which the former spouses filed jointly. Problems arise when the former spouse is unwilling or unavailable to cooperate. In Jusino, a spouse’s interest in a joint refund required her to be a necessary party in the suit. Just as one spouse cannot unilaterally amend a joint return without the other spouse’s signature, a refund claim arising from a joint return similarly requires the other spouse’s participation in the proceeding.