Luis Acle, Jr. - Page 13

                                       - 12 -                                         
          invoices that petitioner submitted to PSEG Global on which he               
          requested reimbursement for expenses totaling $19,548.  PSEG                
          Global’s records indicate that the company paid all but $2,360 of           
          these expenses in accordance with petitioner’s requests for                 
          payment.  Petitioner, however, claimed deductions for numerous              
          expenses on his Schedule C, in an amount totaling $123,040.                 
          Respondent has not challenged $106,040 of these deductions, some            
          of which are for expenses that are of the same type as those for            
          which petitioner requested reimbursement from PSEG Global.                  
          Because petitioner’s Schedule C was filed for his consulting                
          business, and PSEG Global was the primary source of income for              
          this business, we conclude that the Schedule C deductions                   
          substantially encompass the expenses for which petitioner was               
          reimbursed by PSEG Global.  A taxpayer is not entitled to both              
          exclude an amount from income as a reimbursement of an expense and          
          then deduct the same amount as a business expense.  See generally           
          sec. 1.161-1, Income Tax Regs. (providing that “Double deductions           
          are not permitted”.).  Because petitioner has failed to provide             
          records of any sort supporting the amount of his deductions, the            
          Court cannot ascertain whether the $17,188 in reimbursements                
          petitioner received is wholly reflected in the $106,040 of allowed          
          expenses that he claimed as deductions on his return.  We conclude          
          that petitioner has failed to show either that he is entitled to            
          exclude from income any portion of the reimbursements he received           






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011