- 5 - listing the names of prisoners incarcerated in the jail and the number of meals served to each prisoner. Once the statements were certified as correct by the county auditor, the governing Board of Commissioners authorized payment to be made to petitioner. Because he was not required to do so, petitioner did not provide the county auditor with substantiation or verification of the actual costs incurred in feeding county prisoners. Pursuant to the Indiana statutory scheme in effect during the year in issue, petitioner was entitled to retain the difference between the meal allowances he received from the county for feeding the county prisoners and the costs he incurred to do so. In 1991, as county sheriff, petitioner received a $30,566 salary that was appropriately reported as wages on petitioners' 1991 Federal income tax return.3 In addition to his salary, petitioner also received $109,952 as meal allowances from Howard County for providing meals to the prisoners incarcerated in the county jail. Petitioner reported the $109,952 as gross receipts on a Schedule C included with petitioners' 1991 Federal income tax return. The Schedule C reflected that petitioner incurred cost of goods sold in the amount of $68,540. It appears from the Schedule C that the entire amount of the cost of goods sold was composed of purchases made during the year, a conclusion that is There is no dispute that the salary paid to petitioner as county sheriff was paid to him as an employee of Howard County.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011