- 11 -
been a proximate, rather than remote or incidental, relationship
between the claimed expense and petitioner's business. Id.
We have also recognized that some expenditures are so
"inherently personal" that they are never deductible, regardless
of the relative importance of the expenditures in connection with
the taxpayer's trade or business. Fred W. Amend Co. v.
Commissioner, 55 T.C. 320, 325-326 (1970), affd. 454 F.2d 399
(7th Cir. 1971). As we noted in Bakewell v. Commissioner, 23
T.C. 803, 805 (1955), where we held that the taxpayer could not
deduct the cost of a hearing aid:
We believe that a hearing aid is so personal as to
come within the meaning of section 24(a)(1). Even if
it is used in petitioner's business, * * * the device
is so personal as to preclude it from being a business
expense. A businessman's suit, a saleslady's dress,
the accountant's glasses are necessary for their
businesses but the necessity does not overcome the
personal nature of these items and make them a
deductible expense. * * *
In this case, petitioner suggests that his status as a writer of
fiction can convert otherwise personal expenses into deductible
business expenses, simply because the expenditure is related to
something petitioner may wish to write about. We shall address
separately each category of claimed expenses.
(A) Home Office Deductions
Petitioner describes his entire five-room modular home as a
"business location", and claims deductions for all expenses
relating to rent, utilities, maintenance, furnishings, and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011