Christopher Wagner - Page 4




                                        - 3 -                                         

          itemized deductions in lieu of the standard deduction.2  Another            
          concession involves charitable contributions for the 2 years at             
          issue.  At trial, petitioner conceded the adjustments disallowing           
          the cash portion of his contributions.  With these concessions,             
          the remaining issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner is            
          entitled to itemized deductions for noncash charitable                      
          contributions for the 2 years at issue; (2) whether petitioner is           
          entitled to itemized deductions for employee business expenses              
          and tax preparation fees for the 2 years in question; and (3)               
          whether petitioner is liable for the accuracy-related penalties             
          under section 6662(a) for the 2 years in question.  In addition,            
          the Court considers the applicability of section 6673(a) to the             
          facts of this case.                                                         


               2    One technical adjustment will be necessary if                     
          petitioner is allowed to itemize his deductions.  On his 1999               
          return, petitioner claimed an itemized deduction for State and              
          local taxes of $1,792.  During 2000, petitioner received a refund           
          of State and local taxes of $672, which petitioner included as              
          income on his 2000 return.  Since respondent determined in the              
          notice of deficiency that petitioner was entitled to the standard           
          deduction in lieu of itemized deductions for both 1999 and 2000,            
          petitioner, therefore, did not realize a tax benefit from his               
          itemized deduction of State and local taxes for 1999.  Therefore,           
          petitioner's receipt of the $672 State and local tax refund                 
          during 2000 would not constitute income for that year.                      
          Consequently, in the notice of deficiency, respondent determined            
          that the $672 did not constitute gross income for the 2000 tax              
          year.  However, respondent asserted at trial that, based on the             
          Court's holdings in the case, if petitioner is entitled to                  
          itemized deductions for both years in lieu of the standard                  
          deduction, petitioner's gross income for 2000 will be adjusted to           
          include as income the $672 State and local tax refund received by           
          petitioner that year.                                                       




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011