- 17 -
residence was exclusively used on a regular basis as either her
principal place of business or as a place of business. See
sec. 280A(c)(1)(A) and (B); Hefti v. Commissioner, supra.
In view of the foregoing, we sustain respondent’s
determination, see sec. 280A(a), (d)(2), and hold that
petitioner is not entitled to any deduction for rent (office in
the home) for either of the years in issue.
E. Deduction for Telephone Expense
Personal, living, and family expenses are not generally
deductible. See sec. 262(a). Section 262(b) specifically
provides that the cost of basic local telephone service
provided to the first telephone line at the taxpayer's
residence is a nondeductible expense. Additionally, in order
to be deductible, telephone expense must be incurred for
business, rather than for personal, reasons. See sec. 162(a);
Walliser v. Commissioner, 72 T.C. 433, 437 (1979).
Petitioner deducted telephone expenses in 1995 and 1996 in
the amounts of $4,848 and $5,300, respectively. Respondent
disallowed these amounts for lack of substantiation.
At trial, petitioner did not introduce any documentary
evidence, such as telephone logs or monthly service statements,
that would substantiate the deductions in issue. However, we
are satisfied that petitioner did, in fact, incur deductible
telephone expenses during the years in issue. Accordingly,
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011