Betty J. Shackelford - Page 16

                                         - 16 -                                       
          prevent us from applying the doctrine of judicial estoppel.                 
          Accordingly, we hold that respondent is judicially estopped from            
          claiming that the payments to Mr. Maynard were not fees for his             
          consulting services.  It follows that petitioner is entitled to a           
          deduction for the $52,999.50.                                               
               Petitioner claimed a deduction in the amount of $256.16 for            
          expenses incurred in moving Renata's possessions from New Mexico to         
          California.  Petitioner also claimed a deduction in the amount of           
          $248 for an airline ticket to Albuquerque, New Mexico, so that she          
          could assist in moving Renata and Renata's daughter.  In addition,          
          petitioner claimed a deduction in the amount of $48.83 for a room           
          at the Geronimo Motel in Flagstaff, Arizona, where the three of             
          them stayed on their way to California.  Renata had wanted to               
          return to California, but had no money.  Petitioner wanted Renata           
          to work for her, and after moving to California in 1989, Renata             
          went to work for petitioner's business as a translator and a job            
          developer.                                                                  
               In general, where an expenditure is primarily associated with          
          business purposes, and personal benefit is distinctly secondary and         
          incidental, the expenditure may be deducted under section 162.              
          International Artists, Ltd. v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 94, 104                
          (1970); Sanitary Farms Dairy, Inc. v. Commissioner, 25 T.C. 463,            
          467-468 (1955).  Conversely, if an expenditure is primarily                 
          motivated by personal considerations, no deduction will be allowed.         
          Henry v. Commissioner, 36 T.C. 879, 884 (1961); Larrabee v.                 




Page:  Previous  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011