- 8 -
amount actually required and does not include a
voluntary portion. [IRM, Exhibit 5.15.1-3
(Mar. 31, 2000).]
On brief, respondent contends that petitioners’ alleged
tithing expenses should be disallowed pursuant to IRM section
5.8.5.4.2(9) (Nov. 30, 2001), which states that “Charitable
contributions are not allowed.” This IRM subsection, however,
relates expressly to conditional expenses, not necessary
expenses, and does not purport to override the provisions of IRM
Exhibit 5.15.1-3 (Mar. 31, 2000) as set out above.
IV. Whether the Appeals Officer Abused His Discretion
In the Appeals hearing, petitioners were given the
opportunity to substantiate that Mr. Pixley was employed as a
Baptist minister. They failed to do so. In fact, there is no
evidence that Mr. Pixley was employed as a minister when the
notice of determination was issued to petitioners in March 2002
or that he has been employed as a minister at any time since.6
Consequently, even if we were to assume arguendo, as petitioners
assert, that “The Southern Baptist Convention has a doctrine that
6 On brief, petitioners allege that after Mr. Pixley left
Grace Community Church in June 2001, petitioners moved to
California so that Mr. Pixley could prepare to attend a seminary,
that he continued his ministry in an unpaid position as a Baptist
minister, and that he continued to tithe to keep this position.
There is no evidence in the record, however, to substantiate
these allegations, and there is no indication that petitioners
presented any such evidence to the Appeals officer. Even if we
were to assume arguendo that these allegations are true, they do
not establish that tithes were paid as a condition of employment.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011