- 7 - nondeductible personal expenses. See Commissioner v. Flowers, supra at 472-474; Tucker v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 783, 786 (1971). The rationale behind this rule is that a taxpayer is free to choose the location of his personal residence. See Anderson v. Commissioner, 60 T.C. 834, 835 (1973). If we allowed the taxpayer to deduct the commuting expenses, we would be permitting the taxpayer to take a deduction for what is an inherently personal expense. See id.; Alexander v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1979-436. In the instant case, we find that Mr. Knelman’s primary motivation in traveling between Ohio and California was to commute between the locations of his chosen residence and business. Had petitioners remained in southern California, their traveling expenses between work and home would also have been nondeductible commuting expenses. The distance traveled, no matter how far, does not change the character of the commuting expense. See Commissioner v. Flowers, supra at 473. Furthermore, petitioners have not presented any evidence refuting respondent’s determination that the meals petitioners deducted were nondeductible living expenses incurred as a result of their decision to live outside the State where their landscaping business is located. In the instant case, the taxpayers, for personal reasons, wanted to reside in Ohio andPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011