Wayne and June Ellen Hairston - Page 17

                                       - 17 -                                         
          Court constituted their principal place of business for purposes            
          of section 280A(c).  Petitioners have presented no evidence                 
          regarding this issue.  Accordingly, we sustain respondent's                 
          determination.                                                              
               Deductions for Utilities and Depreciation for 1988, 1989,              
               and 1990                                                               
               For the taxable years 1988, 1989, and 1990 petitioners                 
          claimed deductions for utilities and depreciation for their                 
          downtown office and for the portion of their residence that they            
          used as an office.  Respondent disallowed the portion of these              
          deductions attributable to petitioners' home office.                        
               Petitioners may deduct utilities and depreciation                      
          attributable to their home office only if their home office was             
          their principal place of business within the meaning of section             
          280A(c)(1)(A).  This matter depends on the specific facts and               
          circumstances of each particular case.                                      
               Petitioner used the home office for preparing for counseling           
          sessions.  Petitioner did not meet with or counsel clients at the           
          home office and, instead, used the downtown office for that                 
          purpose.  Petitioner testified that he maintained his counseling            
          books and accounting materials at the home office because the               
          presence of these items in the downtown office would have                   
          intimidated the clients.                                                    
               In deciding whether petitioners are entitled to deductions             
          for utilities and depreciation in excess of those allowed by                





Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011