- 16 -
weather. Mr. Emanuel testified that his other son almost never
used the swimming pool.
Both Christopher and Mr. Emanuel used the pool daily for
therapy related to their physical disabilities upon the advice of
doctors. The pool is tailored for use by both Christopher and
Mr. Emanuel, it is usable throughout the year, and Christopher
and Mr. Emanuel used the pool daily. See Haines v. Commissioner,
supra at 648. Other family members do not use the swimming pool
for recreation. Upon these facts, we conclude that the swimming
pool has as its primary purpose and is directly related to the
medical care of both Christopher and Mr. Emanuel. Sec. 1.213-
1(e), Income Tax Regs.
Petitioners did not maintain receipts of the expenses
incurred with respect to the maintenance of the pool; therefore,
they produced an estimate from the swimming pool supply store,
Pinch-A-Penny, from which they purchased supplies. The estimate
provided that the annual cost of maintaining a swimming pool such
as the one owned by petitioners was approximately $1,200.
Moreover, Mr. Emanuel provided testimony as to the items needed
to maintain the pool and their general cost. We find the
estimate from Pinch-A-Penny and Mr. Emanuel’s testimony to be
credible.
Although generally a taxpayer is required to keep records to
establish the amount of his deductions under section 6001, in
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011