- 5 -
For each year in issue, petitioner claimed deductions for
meals and lodging expenses incurred in Guam. Respondent concedes
that the amounts deducted each year were paid or incurred for the
designated purposes. The parties disagree as to whether the
meals and lodging expenses were incurred while petitioner was
traveling away from his tax home for business purposes.
Generally, a taxpayer’s tax home is determined by the
location of the taxpayer’s regular or principal (if more than one
regular) place of business regardless of where the taxpayer’s
residence is located. See Mitchell v. Commissioner, supra at
581; Kroll v. Commissioner, supra at 561-562; sec. 1.911-2(b),
Income Tax Regs. Usually, if the location of the taxpayer’s
regular place of business changes, so does the taxpayer’s tax
home--from the old location to the new location--unless the
period of employment at the new location is, or is reasonably
expected to be, temporary. See Kroll v. Commissioner, supra, at
562-563; Mitchell v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-283. By law,
a “taxpayer shall not be treated as being temporarily away from
home during any period of employment if such period exceeds 1
year.” Sec. 162(a).1
According to petitioner Guam was not his tax home during the
1 For tax years ending after Aug. 5, 1997, the Taxpayer
Relief Act of 1997, Pub. L. 105-34, sec. 1204(a), 111 Stat. 788,
995, amended sec. 162(a) to relax this rule in the case of
certain Federal employees assigned to temporary duty stations to
investigate Federal crimes.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011