Peters, Gamm, West & Vincent, Inc., Richard L. West, Judith L. West, Marc A. Vincent, Deborah S. Vincent, Gary L. Gamm and Connie F. Gamm - Page 19

                                         19                                           
               B.  Necessary                                                          
               A necessary expense is one that is appropriate or helpful to           
          the taxpayer in his profit-seeking activities.  Commissioner v.             
          Heininger, supra at 471.  Peters was an investment adviser.  The            
          aim of the litigation with the SEC was to revoke his license in             
          such endeavors.  We find that the legal expenses were necessary             
          to protect his profit-seeking activities.                                   
               C.  Paid or Incurred During the Tax Year                               
               Respondent conceded that legal fees of $128,854.71,                    
          $198,431.67, and $135,659.23 were incurred for the tax years 1988           
          through 1990, respectively, and that PGWV paid them.  Respondent            
          disallowed deductions of $123,103, $190,245, and $128,131 for the           
          years 1988 through 1990.  We have held that the payment of the              
          legal fees was not deductible as an expense by PGWV under section           
          162(a).                                                                     
               Petitioner argues that the legal fees were constructively              
          paid by him, and refers to Broad v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.                
          1990-317, for support.  In Broad, a C corporation made payments             
          on a loan that was a personal obligation of one of the                      
          shareholders.  This Court held that the payment of the loan                 
          obligation was a constructive dividend; we then allowed the                 
          taxpayer a deduction for the interest on the loan.  In other                
          words, we reasoned that because he was treated as having received           
          an amount equal to the loan payment by the bank for him, he                 
          should be treated as having paid the interest to the bank which             




Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011