- 3 -
however, claims that he is entitled to offset such income with
deductions for living expenses paid while he was working in
Florida.
Deductions are strictly a matter of legislative grace, and
petitioners bear the burden of proving their entitlement to any
deductions claimed. Rule 142(a); INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner,
503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992); Hradesky v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 87
(1975), affd. per curiam 540 F.2d 821 (5th Cir. 1976) In
general, deductions for personal living expenses are disallowed
under section 262.
Section 162(a)(2) allows deductions for traveling expenses
if the expenses are: (1) ordinary and necessary; (2) incurred
while away from home; and (3) incurred in pursuit of a trade or
business. Bochner v. Commissioner, 67 T.C. 824, 827 (1977). The
purpose behind the deduction for expenses paid while a taxpayer
is away from home is to ease the burden on the taxpayer who
incurs additional and duplicate living expenses. Rosenspan v.
United States, 438 F.2d 905, 912 (2d Cir. 1971); Tucker v.
Commissioner, 55 T.C. 783, 786 (1971).
Petitioner testified that he paid $500 per month as rent for
his living quarters, in addition to other living expenses such as
food, laundry, and gasoline for his truck. Petitioner also
testified that he paid $1,500 to repair the truck provided to him
by Liberty Drywall Inc. Petitioner, however, failed to produce
any receipts, documentary evidence, or witnesses at trial in
support of his alleged expenses. It is well established that, in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011