- 54 -
not be given any credence. Accordingly, we hold that she is not
entitled to the claimed home office deduction for 1989.17
Respondent has conceded that during 1989 petitioner incurred
deductible business expenses of $825 for office expenses, bank
charges, printing expenses, and travel. Petitioner has claimed
that she is entitled to deduct other expenses in addition to
those conceded by respondent. She has borne her burden of
proving that she is entitled to deduct additional printing costs
of $24 and miscellaneous costs paid to contractors of $132.
Petitioner further claims a deduction of $5,220 in 1989 for
telephone service. She claims that she maintained one personal
telephone line and two business lines, located in two of her
apartments, and seeks deductions with respect to the claimed
business lines.18 She has offered as proof cancelled checks and
receipts from the telephone company. We are not convinced that
she made payments in the amounts claimed. The records proffered
for each of the claimed business telephone lines contain
cancelled checks that are duplicates of those submitted in
17 Petitioner also claims a deduction of 3 months’ rent in
the summer of 1989 when she allegedly provided a home to Jane M.
in order to move Ms. M. out of the apartment on E. 65th Street.
Petitioner has not established that this was legitimately a trade
or business expense, and accordingly we do not allow the claimed
deduction.
18 Sec. 262(b) provides that, in the case of individuals,
charges for basic local telephone service with respect to the
first telephone line provided to a residence are nondeductible
personal expenses.
Page: Previous 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011