- 2 - At trial, Ps presented evidence as to the estimated, nonmeal travel expenses incurred by C’s drivers. C’s drivers testified as to the average amount of their per diem allowance that they spent on items such as lodging, truck parking, showers, laundry, and Federal Express charges. Held: Despite the presentation of evidence at trial as to the estimated, nonmeal travel expenses incurred by C’s drivers, Ps have failed to establish a basis for deducting 80 percent of the per diem allowance paid to the drivers. Beech Trucking Co. v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 428 (2002), followed. Held, further, Pursuant to Rev. Proc. 94-77, 1994- 2 C.B. 825, Rev. Proc. 96-28, 1996-1 C.B. 686, and Rev. Proc. 96-64, 1996-2 C.B. 427, Ps may only deduct 50 percent of the per diem allowance paid to the drivers. Held, further, sec. 4.02(5) of Rev. Proc. 94-77, 1994-2 C.B. 825, Rev. Proc. 96-28, 1996-1 C.B. 686, and Rev. Proc. 96-64, 1996-2 C.B. 427, is not invalid. Held, further, Ps have not substantiated the actual travel expenses incurred by the drivers pursuant to sec. 274(d), I.R.C. Held, further, the portion of the per diem allowance that Ps estimate is allocated to nonmeal travel expenses may not be deducted in full. J. Betsy Meacham and Roger D. Rowe, for petitioners. Caroline R. Krivacka, for respondent. VASQUEZ, Judge: Respondent disallowed deductions of $836,7292 for the taxable year ending December 31, 1995; $828,067 2 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to (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