- 9 -
Petitioner contends that she meets these requirements based
on the statement of her former unit commander in a letter that
stated “Continued civilian education in the military is necessary
for an officer to retain their current position, improve their
skills, and maintain longevity in the military.” Putting aside
the hearsay problems, we do not find that statement persuasive.
Petitioner does not refer to any “applicable law or regulations”
that required her to obtain a college degree as required by the
regulations, and we know of no such requirement. Rather, it
appears that the National Guard, as do all military
organizations, strongly support and encourage education for its
soldiers. This, however, does not comply with the requirements
of the Department of Treasury regulations. See Baker v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1971-278; Kinch v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1971-117. We sustain respondent’s determinations.
With respect to the remaining miscellaneous deductions
claimed for both taxable years, there simply is no evidence to
indicate that respondent’s determinations are erroneous, and we
sustain those determinations as well.
3. 1997 Rental Expense, 1998 Interest Income, 1998 Charitable
Contribution Deduction, and 1998 Tax Return Preparation and Legal
Fees
As noted in our statement of facts, with one exception,
petitioners either have not addressed or have offered no evidence
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011