Christopher A. Boyko and Roberta A. Boyko - Page 17

                                       - 17 -                                         

          entitled to a deduction from his personal income for his payment            
          of the expenses of his corporation; such amounts constitute                 
          either a loan or a contribution to the capital of the corporation           
          and are deductible, if at all, by the corporation.  Deputy v. du            
          Pont, 308 U.S. 488, 494 (1940); Rink v. Commissioner, 51 T.C.               
          746, 751 (1969).                                                            
               Petitioner argues, in the alternative, that the payments are           
          deductible as an ordinary and necessary expense of petitioner's             
          law practice because they were incurred to protect petitioner's             
          professional reputation as an attorney.  Petitioner cites two               
          cases in support of his position.                                           
               Petitioner cites Jenkins v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1983-             
          667, which involved a country music singer who repaid certain               
          corporate debts to investors of a restaurant business that he had           
          promoted.  The Court allowed the taxpayer to deduct the payments            
          as a section 162 expense of his business as a country singer,               
          even though the taxpayer had no obligation to repay the loans.              
          The Court reasoned that the payments were necessary to protect              
          the taxpayer's personal business reputation, noting that many of            
          the investors were connected with the country music industry.               
          Similarly, in Lutz v. Commissioner, 282 F.2d 614 (5th Cir. 1960),           
          a shareholder of a corporation was allowed to deduct expenses               
          that he paid on behalf of three corporations, even though he had            
          no legal obligation to do so.  The Court of Appeals held that the           
          failure to make these payments might have jeopardized the                   
          taxpayer's licenses in his principal business as a produce buyer            


Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011