Merrell and Francine Vannier - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         

          appealed this ruling to the State Bar Appellate Section, but was            
          unsuccessful.  The Appellate Section not only affirmed the                  
          referee’s determination, but, in addition, found that petitioner            
          had been engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.                       
               On their 1991 Schedule A, petitioners claimed a $5,4333                
          employee business expense deduction as a result of the legal                
          expenses incurred in challenging the Committee’s determination.             
          This amount includes expenditures for discovery and lawyer’s                
          fees.  In the notice of deficiency, the Commissioner disallowed             
          this deduction.                                                             
                                     Discussion                                       
               Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and                      
          petitioners must prove that they are entitled to the claimed                
          deduction.  Rule 142(a); INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S.            
          79, 84 (1992).  Section 162 allows a deduction for all ordinary             
          and necessary expenses paid or incurred during the taxable year             
          in carrying on any trade or business.  Moreover, section 212                
          allows a deduction for ordinary and necessary expenses paid or              
          incurred during the taxable year for the production or collection           
          of income.  Personal expenditures, however, are not deductible.             
          Sec. 262.                                                                   


          3  Petitioner submitted checks totaling $5,672 in support of                
          the above deduction and now claims a deduction for that amount.             
          Respondent has agreed to accept petitioner’s increased amount if            
          petitioner prevails on the substantive issue.                               




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011