- 16 -
spent or incurred for the stated purpose. Williams v. United
States, 245 F.2d 559, 560 (5th Cir. 1957); Vanicek v.
Commissioner, 85 T.C. 731, 743 (1985). Furthermore, in making an
estimate, we must bear heavily on petitioner, "whose inexactitude
is of his own making." Cohan v. Commissioner, supra at 544.
Petitioners did not submit any evidence or testify to the
effect that their house was appraised by a competent
professional, either before or after the damages were sustained.
In addition, petitioners were unable to separate the structural
damages caused by Tropical Storm Allison from the structural
damages caused by the termite infestation. To substantiate the
casualty losses claimed on their returns, petitioners submitted a
letter from FEMA, which references their 1989 grant of $5,660,
photocopies of checks and receipts, handwritten lists of
expenditures, and a written statement from one James Robinson,
dated August 25, 1993, stating that he performed repairs to their
house sustained from Tropical Storm Allison.
We consider the letter from FEMA sufficient to substantiate
that petitioners sustained damages from Tropical Storm Allison,
but only for taxable year 1989 and only in the amount of the
grant, $5,660. Cohan v. Commissioner, supra; sec. 1.165-
7(a)(2)(ii), Income Tax Regs. The checks and receipts submitted
by petitioners, however, are insufficient to substantiate the
1989 casualty loss in excess of $5,660. Many of the checks do
not indicate what was purchased or for what purpose the
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011