- 8 -
with the Court pursuant to Rule 50(c) and a Motion to Strike
certain portions of respondent's supporting memorandum of law and
affidavit.5
During the course of the hearing in Washington, D.C.,
petitioner conceded that he is not in the trade or business of
either gambling or appearing as a contestant on television game
shows. In addition, petitioner stated that his theory of the
case rests solely on section 165.
Discussion
The issue for decision concerns the proper characterization
of the expenses incurred by petitioner in attending and
participating in the television game show "Wheel of Fortune".6
Respondent determined that petitioners erred in netting the
expenses that petitioner incurred for transportation, meals, and
lodging against petitioner's "Wheel of Fortune" winnings. As
indicated, respondent determined that the expenses in dispute are
5 Petitioners' Motion to Strike is directed at what
petitioners believe are unfair or inaccurate allegations,
particularly certain allegations in which respondent
characterizes the expenses incurred by petitioner as vacation
expenses. Given that motions to strike are not favored, see
Estate of Jephson v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 999, 1001 (1983), and
in view of the fact that the allegations in question have not
influenced our disposition of the pending motions, we see no
prejudice to petitioners and shall deny their Motion to Strike.
6 Because petitioner concedes that he is not in the trade or
business of either gambling or appearing as a contestant on
television game shows, it follows that the expenses in question,
if deductible, would not be deductible from gross income. Sec.
62(a)(1); see sec. 162(a).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011