- 17 -
substantiate the expenditure of $617 for tax preparation fees.
Therefore, petitioner has failed to satisfy the requirements of
section 7491(a)(1) and (2)(A). As a result, petitioner retains
the burden of proof with respect to her entitlement to both
deductions. See Rule 142(a).
B. Unreimbursed Employee Business Expenses: Clothing
Expenditures
Petitioner was required by Mervyn’s, her employer during the
first 10-1/2 months of 1999, to wear either black or white suits
or dresses to work.
Generally, the cost of a business wardrobe required as a
condition of employment is considered a nondeductible personal
expense within the meaning of section 262 if the purchased
clothing is suitable for general or personal wear. See, e.g.,
Hynes v. Commissioner, 74 T.C. 1266, 1290 (1980). Lack of
suitability for general or personal wear is one of the three
criteria (the other two being that the clothing is required or
essential in the taxpayer’s employment and that it is not, in
fact, used for general or personal wear) established by this
Court for treating clothing costs as ordinary and necessary
business expenses deductible under section 162. See Yeomans v.
Commissioner, 30 T.C. 757, 767-768 (1958). In Yeomans, we
treated as deductible the taxpayer’s expenditures for items of
clothing required by her employer that were “not suited for her
private and personal wear, as distinguished from business wear”.
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