- 9 - Petitioner testified that he had his shirts and the vests provided by MGM dry cleaned. He claimed that he paid $22 per week to maintain the tuxedo shirts and $25 per week to clean the vests. However, petitioner provided one receipt of $3.85 for dry cleaning. We may estimate the amount of expenses, so long as petitioner provides evidence upon which we can base an estimate. Rodman v. Commissioner, 542 F.2d 845, 853 (2d Cir. 1976), affg. T.C. Memo. 1973-277; Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 540 (2d Cir. 1930). Petitioner provided little evidence other than his vague, undocumented testimony. Nevertheless, we have no doubt he must have incurred some expenses for cleaning the vests and shirts. Using our best estimate, we allow $250 for dry cleaning. We find that petitioner is entitled to deduct $503.08 for his uniform and dry cleaning expenses. However, after concessions and our findings, petitioner’s itemized deductions for 1994 do not exceed the standard deduction. Sec. 63(c); Cotton v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-333. Therefore, it is more advantageous for petitioner to claim the standard deduction as allowed by respondent in the notice of deficiency. respondent’s determination is sustained. C. Schedule C Deductions 1. Sections 162 and 274 Section 162(a) permits a deduction for the ordinary and necessary expenses paid or incurred during the taxable year inPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011