- 10 -
expenditure an appropriate expense to further or promote the
taxpayer's trade or business? Id.
In applying the first prong of the Lohrke test, we take into
account whether there is "a clear proximate danger to the taxpayer
and * * * a payment made to protect an existing business from
harm." Young & Rubicam, Inc. v. United States, 187 Ct. Cl. 635,
410 F.2d 1233, 1243 (1969). The deduction is not allowed if the
taxpayer fails to demonstrate "a direct nexus between the purpose
of the payment and the taxpayer's business or income producing
activities". Lettie Pate Whitehead Found., Inc. v. United States,
606 F.2d 534, 538 (5th Cir. 1979).
Here, the record reflects that the expenses attributable to
the incoming packages and envelopes from Guatemala had a definite
purpose related to petitioner's outbound U.S.-Guatemala courier
business. Approximately 78 percent of items petitioner delivered
to Guatemala contained money orders or checks from Guatemalans
living in the United States to their family members back home. For
the most part, these individuals had temporary jobs and were highly
transient. There was uncontroverted testimony that most of the
inbound mail contained requests for money. In order to promote
petitioner's business, petitioner had to possess the means to
communicate with these transient workers. Petitioner accomplished
this by creating a "fluid mailing list" of Guatemalans living in
the United States for purposes of targeting customers. We are
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011