John H. Hudgens III - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                         


          tasks and activities performed at STC differed substantially from           
          the tasks and activities performed at Arthur Andersen.                      
               In passing, petitioner mentions that his duties at                     
          Williamson were not substantially different from his duties at              
          Arthur Andersen.  While this contention may not be disputed, it             
          is not dispositive of the issue before us, because the record               
          does not support the conclusion that petitioner's temporary,                
          part-time work at Williamson established him in the trade or                
          business of accounting after he attended Emory.  Indeed,                    
          petitioner disavowed any intent to return to the accounting                 
          profession at that time.  Cf. Link v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 460             
          (1988), affd. without published opinion 869 F.2d 1491 (6th Cir.             
          1989); Reisine v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1970-310.                        
               Accordingly, we hold that petitioner may not deduct the                
          educational expenses in issue.  To reflect the concessions,                 
                                                  Decision will be entered            
                                             under Rule 155.                          
















Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  

Last modified: May 25, 2011