- 24 -
expense under section 162(a), the taxpayer must demonstrate that
the expenses were different from, or in excess of, what he would
have spent for personal purposes. Sutter v. Commissioner, 21
T.C. 170, 173 (1953). Petitioners did not produce any evidence
that the food and the rent for the homestead were other than
ordinary living expenses. Thus, petitioners have failed to
establish that the Hubers are entitled to a deduction for any
portion of the expenses under section 162.4
Issue 2. Accuracy-Related Penalty Under Section 6662(a)
Respondent determined that Waterfall Farms is liable for the
accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(a). As pertinent
here, section 6662(a) imposes a 20-percent penalty on the portion
of an underpayment attributable to negligence or disregard of
rules or regulations. Sec. 6662(b)(1). Negligence includes any
failure to make a reasonable attempt to comply with the
provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. Sec. 6662(c); sec.
1.6662-3(b)(1), Income Tax Regs.
4Except as otherwise provided, an individual is not allowed
a deduction with respect to the use of a dwelling unit that is
used by the individual as a residence. Sec. 280A(a). The
individual, however, may deduct expenses allocable to portions of
the dwelling that are exclusively used for business purposes.
Sec. 280A(c). In the case at bar, the Hubers did not argue that
their housing expenses are deductible under sec. 280A.
Therefore, we do not address the question of whether certain
portions of their expenses may be deductible under that section.
We note, however, that the Hubers have made no showing that the
farmhouse, or any portion thereof, was used exclusively for
business purposes.
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011