Lionel D. Jones - Page 7

                                        - 6 -                                         

          for a telephone line required in petitioner’s home by both the              
          police and fire departments.  The $650 cellular expense was for a           
          cellular telephone that he used in both jobs.                               
               The amount of expenses listed on the worksheet totaled                 
          $1,761.01 less than the amount petitioner claimed on Schedule A             
          of his income tax return.  Petitioner testified that he also                
          incurred unreimbursed job-related expenses for socks and shoes,             
          belts, short pants, bed linen, and food, which accounts for the             
          difference between the $4,838.99 listed on the worksheet and the            
          $6,600 claimed on his return.                                               
               With respect to the $485 claimed for the second telephone              
          line in petitioner's home and the $650 claimed for the cellular             
          telephone, petitioner maintained no contemporaneously prepared              
          records to document his employee-related uses of these devices.             
          At the time his return was under audit by respondent, petitioner            
          prepared a worksheet to support the claimed deductions.  Such               
          evidence does not suffice to satisfy the substantiation                     
          requirements for use of the cellular telephone because a cellular           
          telephone is listed property under section 280F(d)(4)(A)(v).                
          Moreover, with respect to the second telephone line, the Court is           
          not bound to accept petitioner's uncorroborated or self-serving             
          testimony that the amount claimed related to his employee-related           
          use of that line, and that there was no personal use involved.              
          Petitioner, therefore, has failed to sustain his burden on that             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011