James Albert and Beverly Alderman - Page 18

                                       - 17 -                                         
          an estimate may be made and to permit us to conclude that a                 
          deductible expense, rather than a nondeductible personal expense,           
          was incurred in at least the amount allowed.  Williams v. United            
          States, 245 F.2d 559, 560 (5th Cir. 1957); Vanicek v.                       
          Commissioner, 85 T.C. 731, 742-743 (1985).5                                 
               The record before us is rife with inconsistencies as to                
          nearly every element that would be germane to our ability to                
          determine or estimate the amount of any deductible expenses for             
          Mr. Alderman’s transportation.  We first consider mileage.  At              
          trial, Mr. Alderman testified that the distance between                     
          petitioners’ residence and his place of work was 45 miles,                  
          between his work and Mrs. Alderman’s work was 55 miles, and                 
          between Mrs. Alderman’s work and their residence was 7 miles.  He           

               5 In written communications with the Court, petitioners                
          indicate some disagreement between the parties regarding our                
          authority to estimate deductible expenses.  Petitioners imply               
          that the extent of this authority may have been misrepresented by           
          respondent, thereby influencing petitioners’ choice to forgo                
          particular arguments.  Petitioners cite Maher v. Commissioner,              
          T.C. Memo. 2003-85, for the proposition that “the court estimated           
          an expense not documented monetarily but was physically proven to           
          have been incurred.”  While we regret any misunderstanding that             
          may have ensued between the parties, we clarify that petitioners’           
          reading of Maher v. Commissioner, supra, would appear to be                 
          overly broad.  Specifically, the evidence in that case                      
          established a specific total amount paid by Mr. Maher for                   
          automobile insurance.  Id.  Based on the record presented, this             
          Court was then able to estimate the percentage of that insurance            
          attributable to Mrs. Maher’s use of the automobile(s) and                   
          consequently deductible as alimony.  Id.  Maher v. Commissioner,            
          supra, however, does not permit the Court to estimate the                   
          deductible portion of an expense when there is no documentary or            
          other credible evidence in the record establishing the total                
          expense incurred.                                                           





Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011