- 16 -
States v. Correll, supra at 304-305. On the other hand, where no
lodging expense is incurred, the meal expenses incurred by the
taxpayer do not add to the taxpayer's business expenses because
such expenses result from the sort of rest that anyone can, at
any time, without special arrangement and without special
expense, take in his own automobile or office. See Barry v.
Commissioner, supra at 1213; see also Siragusa v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 1980-68, affd. without published opinion 659 F.2d 1062
(2d Cir. 1981). The fact that petitioner's rests were
necessitated by a medical condition does not render his meal
expenses deductible as travel expenses. In Barry v.
Commissioner, 435 F.2d at 1291, the Court stated:
The Commissioner's rule, known as the overnight rule,
and approved in United States v. Correll, * * *, is
particularly aimed at formulating an objective test
which will obviate individual analysis of countless
factual variations * * *. Nor does [the] taxpayer
qualify as one obliged to sleep or rest simply because
the length of his trip tired him, and he stopped by the
side of the road for a brief nap. * * * The rule
requires a stop of sufficient duration that it would
normally be related to a significant increase in
expenses. * * * [Emphasis added.]
See Chappie v. Commissioner, 73 T.C. 823, 830 (1980). Under
Barry v. Commissioner, supra, the factual variation suggested by
petitioner does not entitle him to a deduction of his travel
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011