- 13 - advance is received. The facts and circumstances of each arrangement determine whether an employee is required to return amounts in excess of substantiated expenses. Id. Under the arrangement here, petitioner was required to get Mr. Kerkinni’s permission before making expenditures for IMC. He was also required to submit his receipts to Mr. Kerkinni for reimbursement. IMC agreed to pay petitioner whatever amounts it could afford to pay as reimbursements. There is no evidence that petitioner was required to return any amounts he received that exceeded his expenses. Although petitioner was required to substantiate expenses, the annual reimbursement amounts exceeded petitioner’s expenses. If the excess amounts were meant to be advances for anticipated expenses petitioner would make, there is no evidence that the advances were calculated to approximate the amounts of the anticipated expenditures. The record does not show whether petitioner did in fact return any of the excess amounts to IMC. Based on all the facts available to us, we do not believe that the arrangement between petitioner and Mr. Kerkinni required petitioner to return excess amounts to IMC. Therefore, the arrangement did not satisfy the returning amounts in excess of expenses requirement of section 1.62-2(f), Income Tax Regs. We believe that petitioner and Mr. Kerkinni did come to an agreement about how IMC would reimburse petitioner for hisPage: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011