- 20 -
expenditures made by petitioner for other individuals do not
constitute payments "to" a charitable organization.
As noted above, section 1.170A-1(g), Income Tax Regs.,
allows a taxpayer a deduction for unreimbursed expenses incurred
incident to the rendition of charitable services. In Davis v.
United States, supra, the Supreme Court held that the taxpayers
were not entitled to deduct amounts paid to their sons to finance
the expenses of their sons' Mormon missions. In rejecting the
taxpayers' claim that the expenses were deductible as
unreimbursed expenses the Supreme Court noted that the taxpayers
did not render the services, their sons did. Id. at 487.
Petitioner's situation is slightly different, in that he did
independently render charitable services. Nonetheless, we
conclude the expenses paid on behalf of others are more
accurately characterized as nondeductible gifts made to specific
individuals rather than expenses incurred by petitioner incident
to his rendering of charitable services.
Petitioner cites Rockefeller v. Commissioner, 676 F.2d 35
(2d Cir. 1982), affg. 76 T.C. 178 (1981), Smith v. Commissioner,
60 T.C. 988 (1973), and McCollum v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1978-435, for the proposition that a taxpayer may deduct payments
made for the expenses of others pursuant to section 1.170A-1(g),
Income Tax Regs. McCollum and Smith involved situations where
parents and their children incurred expenses while both rendered
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011