- 2 -
(1) Is petitioner entitled to deduct for 2000 claimed
Schedule A expenses in excess of those allowed by respondent? We
hold that he is not.
(2) Is petitioner entitled to deduct for 1999 and 2000
claimed Schedule C expenses? We hold that he is not.
(3) Is petitioner entitled to deduct for 1999 or 2000 a
claimed rental loss? We hold that he is not.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Many of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.
Petitioner resided in St. Paul, Minnesota, at the time he
filed the petition in this case.
During 1999 and 2000, petitioner worked as a carpenter, for
which he was paid hourly wages. During those years, when peti-
tioner was not working as a carpenter for hourly wages, he was
making improvements to his personal residence, which included
building cabinets, installing trim, and making headpieces for the
doors.
1(...continued)
below, there are other questions relating to certain determina-
tions in the notice of deficiency (notice) that are computational
in that their resolution flows automatically from our resolution
of the remaining issues that we address herein, from the parties’
stipulation of facts, and from respondent’s concessions with
respect to certain determinations in the notice. Although
petitioner claimed at trial that respondent determined that he
has unreported income for 2000, the notice did not make any such
determination. We conclude that there is no issue in the instant
case relating to unreported income for petitioner’s taxable year
2000.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011