- 9 -
Any expenses related to the law practice must be claimed on
Schedule C.
The Court rejects petitioner’s argument that section 63
violates his due process and equal protection rights. Generally,
where no fundamental rights are threatened, statutory
classifications are valid if they bear a rational relation to a
legitimate governmental purpose. Regan v. Taxation With
Representation, 461 U.S. 540, 547 (1983). Particularly in the
area of family taxation, Congress must be accorded wide latitude.
Druker v. Commissioner, 697 F.2d 46, 50-51 (2d Cir. 1982), affg.
in part and revg. in part 77 T.C. 867 (1981). Here, no
fundamental right of petitioner’s is at stake, and petitioner has
not overcome the strong presumption of constitutionality afforded
tax legislation. Regan v. Taxation With Representation, supra at
547; Nammack v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 1379, 1385 (1971), affd.
per curiam 459 F.2d 1045 (2d Cir. 1972); Black v. Commissioner,
69 T.C. 505, 507-508 (1977). Further, “perfect equality or
absolute logical consistency between persons subject to the
Internal Revenue Code * * * [is not] a constitutional sine qua
non”. Barter v. United States, 550 F.2d 1239, 1240 (7th Cir.
1977) (per curiam) (statutory difference in tax rates for married
couples and single individuals does not violate Fifth Amendment
Due Process). Petitioner’s constitutional argument is rejected.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011