- 9 -
(1973), affd. without published opinion 489 F.2d 752 (2d Cir.
1974). The “origin-of-the-claim” which gave rise to the
litigation, rather than the consequence of the litigation, is
evaluated to ascertain whether the expenses are business or
personal in nature. United States v. Gilmore, 372 U.S. 39, 48-49
(1963).
In the present case, we are faced with the convergence of
the above legal principles. Petitioner attempts to deduct legal
expenses incurred through his effort to gain admission to the
California Bar. He contends that he is entitled to deduct these
fees as an ordinary and necessary business expense. Petitioner
asserts that his primary purpose for seeking admission to the
California Bar was to protect his job at the Taylor firm and to
defend his professional reputation. Conversely, respondent
argues that the legal fees are nondeductible expenditures.
Respondent contends that the origin of petitioner’s legal action
stemmed from his application to the California Bar and is
therefore nondeductible. We agree with respondent.
Petitioner confuses the concept of the origin-of-the-claim
with that of the consequence or the primary purpose of the
litigation. Only the origin-of-the-claim is relevant to the
disposition of this case. Harden v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1991-454. Petitioner’s challenge to the Committee’s
determination gave rise to the legal fees in question. Hence,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011