- 5 -
Command Systems had separated petitioner's "per diem allowance"
amount from petitioner's base rate, petitioner would not have
been subject to the AMT. We are not persuaded by petitioners'
argument.
While we may sympathize with petitioners, under the plain
meaning of the statute they are subject to the AMT. Furthermore,
this Court has considered and rejected equitable arguments like
those of petitioners. See Huntsberry v. Commissioner, 83 T.C.
742, 747-753 (1984); Holly v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-55.
Petitioner may be correct in asserting that the AMT would
not apply if Command Systems had designated certain amounts paid
to petitioner as reimbursed employee business expenses rather
than as wages. Petitioner, however, negotiated the best contract
that he could, and his remuneration must be taxed based on the
manner in which it was received. Respondent's determination is
sustained.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Last modified: May 25, 2011