Jesse Emmit and Marjorie A. Rupert - Page 5




                                        - 5 -                                         
               Petitioners claimed $39,274 of legal, professional, and                
          related expenses in connection with their daughter’s divorce and            
          custody litigation.  We note that some portion of the claimed               
          expenses related to petitioners’ attempt to gain custody of their           
          grandchild.  Petitioner argues that he was engaged in a full-time           
          consulting business during the years under consideration and that           
          his involvement in Michelle’s divorce and custody proceedings was           
          part of that endeavor.  Respondent has countered that, as a                 
          preliminary matter, petitioner’s consulting activity did not rise           
          to the level of being a trade or business.  Even if petitioner’s            
          consulting activity was a trade or business, respondent argues              
          that the expenses paid in connection with Michelle’s domestic               
          relations litigation are not directly connected with or                     
          proximately related to petitioner’s consulting activity.                    
          Finally, respondent argues that the origin and very nature of               
          petitioners’ involvement in their daughter’s domestic relations             
          activity are personal.  We agree with respondent that the                   
          expenses in question are not deductible.3                                   
               Petitioner retired from his position as a drilling manager             
          for Atlantic Richfield during 1987 and after that time was paid             
          on one occasion during 1991 for consulting in connection with his           



               3 We need not decide whether sec. 7491(a) affects the                  
          placement of the burden of proof here, because we resolve the               
          issues on the basis of a preponderance of the evidence in the               
          record.                                                                     





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011