- 13 -
petitioner.
Based on our examination of the entire record before us, we
find that petitioner has failed to establish his entitlement to
the 1993 claimed theft loss or to any other loss for 1993 that
resulted in an NOL for that year which he is entitled to carry
forward to the year at issue.7 Accordingly, we sustain respon-
dent’s determination to disallow the claimed NOL deduction.
With respect to petitioner’s contention that respondent
erred in determining to disallow the claimed Schedule C-expense
deductions, as pertinent here, section 162(a) allows a deduction
for ordinary and necessary expenses paid during the taxable year
in carrying on any trade or business. The determination of
whether an expenditure satisfies the requirements for deductibil-
ity under section 162 is a question of fact. See Commissioner v.
Heininger, 320 U.S. 467, 475 (1943). In general, an expense is
7Assuming arguendo that petitioner had proved that he had an
NOL for 1993, we nonetheless find that petitioner failed to
satisfy his burden to show that he was entitled to an NOL deduc-
tion for the year at issue. In general, a taxpayer who sustains
an NOL must first carry such loss back 3 years and, if unab-
sorbed, then forward 15 years. See sec. 172(b)(1)(A), (2). The
taxpayer may elect to relinquish the entire carryback period and
simply carry the loss forward for 15 years. See sec. 172(b)(3).
Any such election must be made by the due date, including exten-
sions of time, for filing the taxpayer's return for the taxable
year of the NOL. See sec. 172(b)(3). On the record before us,
assuming arguendo that petitioner had established that he had an
NOL for 1993, we find that petitioner has failed to show that he
timely made the election described in sec. 172(b)(3) and, if he
did not, that the claimed loss was not absorbed for the 3 years
prior to 1993.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011