Generally no, except in what I would consider no-brainer, no harm/no foul instances like Bursztyn v. Bursztyn, 379 NJ Super 385 (App. Div. 2005). Essentially, compelling a joint return must be predictably inconsequential.
Under the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C.A. § 6013(a)) a husband and wife may file "a single return jointly of income taxes." A joint return treats the married couple as a single taxable unit. Taft v. Helvering, 311 U.S. 195, 198, 61 S.Ct. 244, 246, 85 L.Ed. 122, 124 (1940); United States v. Allen, 551 F.2d 208, 210-211 (8 Cir.1977). Although such an election may result in substantial tax savings, see Parker v. United States, 524 F.2d 479, 481 (5 Cir.1975), and Estate of Upshaw v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 416 F.2d 737, 742 (7 Cir.1969), cert. den. 397 U.S. 962, 90 S.Ct. 993, 25 L.Ed.2d 254 (1970), the right cannot fairly be said to be inconsequential. Its exercise may have potential civil or even criminal ramifications. "Married individuals filing a joint return expose themselves to joint and several liability for any fraudulent or erroneous aspect" of the contents. Leftwich v. Leftwich, supra at 145. A spouse may be held liable on a joint return even though he or she never signed it. Kann v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 210 F.2d 247 (3 Cir.1953), cert. den. 347 U.S. 967, 74 S.Ct. 778, 98 L.Ed. 1109 (1954).
------------------------------
Curtis Romanowski Esq.
Senior Attorney - Proprietor
Metuchen NJ
(732)603-8585
Original Message:
Sent: 03-24-2016 13:59
From: Lisa Radell
Subject: Forcing joint returns - can judge compel?
Dave –
Take a look at Bursztyn v. Bursztyn, 379 NJ Super 385 (AD '05). "[C]ourts should avoid compelling parties to execute joint tax returns because of the potential liability to which the parties would be exposed" [at 398].
Lisa M. Radell, Esq.
207 South Main Street
Cape May Court House, NJ 08210
Tel (609) 465-9910
Fax (609) 465-9920