- 2 -
Respondent determined a deficiency of $6,436 in petitioner’s
Federal income tax for the year 2001. After concessions,2 the
issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner is entitled to
deduct certain unreimbursed employee expenses; and (2) whether
petitioner is entitled to a deduction for charitable
contributions under section 170.3
Some of the facts were stipulated. Those facts, with the
annexed exhibits, are so found and are made part hereof.
Petitioner’s legal residence at the time the petition was filed
was Memphis, Tennessee.
Petitioner was employed in two separate occupations during
the year at issue, firefighting and law enforcement. As a
firefighter, he was employed by the City of Memphis and worked
24-hour shifts. On his days off from that job, he worked for the
police department of the Memphis Housing Authority. Petitioner
was required to purchase uniforms for both his firefighting and
law enforcement occupations. He received a small uniform
2 Respondent conceded petitioner's entitlement to two
dependency exemption deductions and head-of-household filing
status. Petitioner conceded an unreported interest income
adjustment.
3 Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and
petitioner bears the burden of proving that he is entitled to the
deductions claimed. Rule 142(a); New Colonial Ice Co. v.
Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934). The burden of proof has not
shifted to respondent pursuant to sec. 7491 since petitioner has
not complied with the requirements of sec. 7491(a)(2)(A) and (B).
Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438 (2001).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011