- 6 - new employment in the employee’s same trade or business. See Primuth v. Commissioner, supra. If the employee is seeking a job in a new trade or business, however, the expenses are not deductible under section 162(a). See Frank v. Commissioner, 20 T.C. 511, 513-514 (1953). Petitioner’s primary source of income during the years in issue, not including income of his spouse, was from West Telemarketing in Omaha, Nebraska. The following sources and amounts of income were reported on his returns: 1995 1996 West Telemarketing $7,518.69 $23,405.48 Sitel Corporation 2,156.60 -0- Westin Hotels and Resorts 281.13 -0- Sharp Personnel Services 681.50 -0- Nesco Service Company 883.88 -0- 11,521.80 23,405.48 Petitioner failed to establish how expenses he deducted on his returns were ordinary and necessary expenses in carrying on his employment at West Telemarketing or at one of the other companies by which he was employed. Nor did petitioner establish the existence of any other business for which the expenses could have been ordinary and necessary. Petitioner on occasion paid “practicing fees” to the Supreme Court of Nigeria; he testified that he maintained a legal practice in Nigeria, and that the travel expenses he incurred were primarily in connection with this practice. He also testified that a portion of the expenses was related to (1) his contacting businesses in order toPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011