- -20
expenditure, the time and place of the expenditure, the business
purpose of the expense, and the business relationship involved.
Petitioner introduced in evidence documents that he contends
show unreimbursed employee business expenses. Petitioner
testified that had he applied for reimbursement of these
expenses, his employer would have reimbursed him for the
expenditures. Not only has petitioner failed to meet his burden
of substantiating these claimed expense deductions by proper
evidence, he has failed to show that they would be deductible
even if substantiated. These expenditures, if for business
purposes, would have been reimbursed by his employer had he
claimed reimbursement. See Lucas v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 1, 6-7
(1982); Fountain v. Commissioner, 59 T.C. 696, 708 (1973).
Petitioner testified that some of these expenses which he claimed
as deductible may have actually been reimbursed by his employer,
and that some were nondeductible personal expenditures. Based on
this record, petitioner has failed to show that he is entitled to
a deduction for unreimbursed employee business expenses in 1991
in any amount. We, therefore, sustain respondent's disallowance
of petitioner's claimed deduction in 1991 of unreimbursed
employee business expenses.
Petitioner claimed a deduction for "repayment under claim of
right" in the amount of $14,714. Petitioner testified that this
amount related to litigation involving child support for his
daughter, and argued in his brief that this amount was "arrearage
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011