- 2 - Held: P’s tax home is the situs of his residence. Held, further, P’s testimony, by itself, supports a finding that P paid incidental travel expenses while employed away from his tax home. Held, further, P’s use of the M&IE rates is limited to the portions thereof that are attributable to incidental expense. Steven R. Stolar and Kristina S. Keller, for petitioners. Ric D. Hulshoff, for respondent. LARO, Judge: Respondent determined deficiencies of $945 and $1,022 in petitioners’ 1994 and 1996 Federal income taxes, respectively. The deficiencies stem from respondent’s disallowance of $3,784 and $3,654 that Marin I. Johnson (petitioner) claimed for the respective years as miscellaneous itemized deductions for travel expenses connected to his employment as a merchant seaman. Petitioner ascertained the amount of those deductions by using the full Federal per diem rates for meal and incidental expense (M&IE rates) referenced in Rev. Proc. 96-28, 1996-1 C.B. 686, and its progenitors. See, e.g., id. sec. 4.03, 1996-1 C.B. at 688. Petitioner’s actual expenses consisted solely of incidental expenses; while he was at work, his employer furnished him with lodging and meals at no charge. We must decide whether petitioner may deduct the claimed amounts. We hold he may not. We hold that petitioner’s use ofPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011