- 13 -
from his home is allowed to deduct the costs of meals and lodging
at his temporary job site on the theory that he is "away from
home". Tucker v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 783, 786 (1971). As
discussed previously, the purpose of this rule is to mitigate the
hardship suffered by taxpayers who must maintain two places of
abode and therefore incur duplicate living expenses. See Barone
v. Commissioner, supra. However, an employee who accepts
employment of an indefinite duration cannot deduct living costs
at the distant job site. See Peurifoy v. Commissioner, 358 U.S.
59 (1958). In addition, when a husband and wife are employed or
conduct business indefinitely in two widely separated locations,
they cannot deduct living expenses incurred at either site. See
Foote v. Commissioner, 67 T.C. 1 (1976).
Petitioner has not established that his job in El Paso was
temporary. He offered no evidence that the teaching position was
for a limited time after which he intended to return to
Nashville. On the contrary, the entire record indicates that El
Paso had become petitioner's principal place of business
following his move from Las Vegas. Petitioner arrived in El Paso
in late July for a job commencing on August 1, 1995. As of
September 8, 1997, 2 years after the job commenced, petitioner
continued to reside in El Paso. Accordingly, petitioners are not
entitled to deduct the $5,420 in living expenses as temporary
living expenses.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011