- 10 -
petitioners’ argument, the deduction would nevertheless be
disallowed because the payments received for worker’s
compensation would be considered as compensated for by insurance
or otherwise. Sec. 213(a). The deduction would also be
disallowed with respect to petitioners’ 1997 and 1998 tax years
because the amounts paid for the services provided to Mr.
Emanuel, which are qualified long-term care services as defined
under section 7702B(c), are treated as not paid for medical care
because the services were provided by Mr. Emanuel’s spouse. Sec.
213(d)(11)(A). Respondent is sustained on this issue.
b. New van
Petitioners replaced their old van with the purchase of a
new Chevrolet van in 1998 for $32,000. Petitioners purchased a
van, rather than another vehicle, such as an automobile, in order
to accommodate Mr. Emanuel’s scooter. Petitioners claim that
they are entitled to deduct $12,225 as a medical expense which
represents approximately the difference between the cost of the
new van, at $32,000, and the cost of a new car, such as a
Chevrolet Lumina, at $19,775.6
6 Petitioners argue that their position is supported by a
private letter ruling and two revenue rulings. None of these
rulings supports petitioners’ position. Revenue rulings do not
have the force of law. Lucky Stores, Inc. v. Commissioner, 153
F.3d 964, 966 n.4 (9th Cir. 1998), affg. 107 T.C. 1 (1996),
supplemented by T.C. Memo. 1997-70. As indicated, a taxpayer may
not rely on a private letter ruling issued to another taxpayer.
See supra note 5.
Page: 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