- 8 - office space. That space, located in Hollywood, California (the Hollywood premises), was used by Melissa as living space during periods when she was unable to return to reside with petitioner in Irvine. Prior to the trial in this case, petitioner did not substantiate the balance of the expenses listed on Schedule C, which consisted of $1,336 of depreciation expense and $1,422 of “increased office expense.” Petitioner’s Schedule A Deductions (1) Clothing Expense: $9,721 During 1999, in her position as a district manager for Mervyn’s, petitioner was required by her employer to wear black or white dresses or suits (the latter to consist of either pants or a skirt with matching jacket) while on the job. There was no need to go to “specialized” stores for the required clothing, and there was no company logo on the clothing. Because petitioner did not own black or white dresses and suits, she was required to purchase a new wardrobe, and the cost, in 1999, was $9,721.5 5 On brief, petitioner argues, for the first time, that the $9,721 in unreimbursed employee business expenses consists of $8,490 of “vehicle expense”, $350 of “parking fees, tolls and transportation”, $450 of “travel expenses”, and only $431 of “clothing costs”. At trial, petitioner testified that the entire $9,721 was attributable to “[t]he clothing allowance that was disallowed”, and she agreed with the Court’s description of the issue of unreimbursed employee business expenses as involving only clothing. There is no evidence in the record to support petitioner’s allegation on brief that the $9,721 at issue mostly relates to expenditures other than for clothing that she was required to wear on the job. Therefore, we find that the entire (continued...)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