Frank and Barbara Biehl - Page 36




                                       - 36 -                                         
          are, in effect, denied the benefit of a deduction for Mr. Biehl’s           
          attorney’s fee.  Kenseth v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 399, 407                 
          (2000) (quoting Alexander v. Commissioner, 72 F.3d at 946), affd.           
          259 F.3d 881 (7th Cir. 2001).  However, the injustice is the                
          direct result of the plain meaning and original intent of section           
          62(a), with its built-in disparity in treatment of Schedule C               
          expenses and employee expenses, and the mechanical operation of             
          the itemized deduction provisions of sections 67 and 68 and the             
          AMT provisions.  Petitioners’ efforts to circumvent the business            
          connection requirement built into section 62(a)(2)(A) and to                
          avoid the restrictions on the deductibility of itemized                     
          deductions must fail.  We conclude in this case, as we have in              
          prior cases, that it is the job of Congress, if it should decide            
          in its wisdom to do so, to cure the injustice.  Kenseth v.                  
          Commissioner, supra at 407-408.  We sustain respondent’s                    
          determination.                                                              

                                             Decision will be entered for             
                                        respondent.                                   
















Page:  Previous  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  

Last modified: May 25, 2011