- 12 -12
deficiency or the pleadings and should not be considered by the
Court. However, if the alternative issue is considered, petitioner
argues that respondent bears the burden of proof on this "new issue"
and has failed to carry that burden.
We begin by noting that determinations by the Commissioner
are presumed correct, and the taxpayer has the burden of proof to
overcome that presumption. Rule 142(a). The fact that the case is
fully stipulated does not change the burden of proof. Borchers v.
Commissioner, 95 T.C. 82, 91 (1990), affd. 943 F.2d 22 (8th Cir.
1991).
Section 162(a)(2) allows taxpayers to deduct "the ordinary
and necessary expenses paid or incurred during the taxable year in
carrying on any trade or business, including * * * traveling
expenses (including amounts expended for meals and lodging * * *)
while away from home in the pursuit of a trade or business". The
Supreme Court has established a three-prong test for allowing
deductions under section 162(a)(2). The expense must be (1)
reasonable and necessary, (2) incurred while away from home, and (3)
incurred in the pursuit of a trade or business. Commissioner v.
Flowers, 326 U.S. 465, 470 (1946).
As a general rule, if a taxpayer is employed permanently or
for an indefinite time away from his usual abode, "home" for the
purposes of section 162(a)(2) means the vicinity of the taxpayer's
principal place of employment and not where his or her personal
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011