- 2 - The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioners are entitled to deductions for expenses, under section 162(a), incurred in connection with a medical research activity conducted by Curtis G. Lockett (petitioner) during the years at issue, and (2) whether petitioners are entitled to an itemized deduction, under Schedule A, for job expenses and other miscellaneous expenses for the year 1991.2 Some of the facts were stipulated. Those facts, with the exhibits submitted therewith, are so found and are incorporated herein by reference. At the time the petition was filed, petitioners' legal residence was Mobile, Alabama. For some 20 years prior to the years at issue, petitioner was a home building contractor. Sometime during this period, petitioner maintained a home laboratory for the purpose of developing a medicine to treat his minor daughter who was 2 Petitioners conceded the failure to include in gross income dividends for the year 1991. The parties agree that the correct amount of the unreported dividend income is $94.52 instead of $96 as set out in the notice of deficiency. Petitioners also conceded the failure to include in gross income for the year 1991 the $500 premature distribution of an individual retirement account. Respondent determined, in the notice of deficiency, the 10-percent additional tax on early distributions from qualified retirement plans under sec. 72(t). Although petitioners did not expressly concede this adjustment, they presented no evidence and did not address this issue at trial. Petitioners are deemed to have waived this issue. The Court, therefore, determines that adjustment against petitioners. Rule 149(b); Walker-Scott Corp. v. Commissioner, 35 T.C. 34, 37 (1960). All other adjustments in the notice of deficiency are computational, based upon the Court's holding on the contested issues.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011