- 2 -
Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner’s 1998
Federal income tax in the amount of $3,334. After concessions by
respondent and petitioner, the sole issue this Court must decide
is whether petitioner is entitled to deduct the cost of removing
and replacing the roof-covering material on her residential
rental house.
Some of the facts in this case have been stipulated and are
so found. Petitioner resided in Compton, California, at the time
she filed her petition.
During 1998, petitioner, an employee of the United States
Postal Service, owned a residential rental house in Long Beach,
California (rental house). The rental house was a one-story
building with 2 bedrooms and a den.
The house had been rented to the then tenant for about 4
years when the roof began leaking and moisture began seeping
through the walls into the main bedroom of the house. The tenant
complained to petitioner and, as petitioner put it in lay
person’s terms: “So we had to get it repaired.” She could not
have continued to rent the house if the roof had continued to
leak.
Petitioner contacted TEAM DK Contractors (the contractors),
who gave petitioner an estimate. She “went with them” and paid
the contractors with funds she had to borrow. One of the
partners of the contractors testified at trial that “we did
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011