- 8 -
sections of the Code. He insisted that section 262, which
prohibits the deduction of personal, living, or family expenses,
applies only to businesses or corporations. He contended that
section 535, which applies to accumulated taxable income for
purposes of the corporate accumulated income tax, allows him to
accumulate a certain amount of taxable income. Notwithstanding
his purported familiarity with numerous Code sections, he failed
to show that he qualified for deduction of any expenses that
would be allowed if substantiated. There is no evidence in the
record that any part of petitioner’s home was used exclusively
and regularly for business or otherwise qualifies for an
exception from the general rule of section 280A disallowing
expenses of a dwelling unit used by the taxpayer as a personal
residence. Although he presented a single document that
apparently related to real property taxes on his residence, he
presented no proof of payment, and the amount shown on the
document as due in 2000 was substantially less than amounts that
he claimed on his returns for 1999 and 2000.
In summary, this is basically another case where a taxpayer
claims that his wages are not taxable income. His arguments are
indistinguishable from those that have been uniformly rejected,
and no further discussion of them is warranted. See Lonsdale v.
United States, 919 F.2d 1440 (10th Cir. 1990); United States v.
Connor, 898 F.2d 942, 943 (3d Cir. 1990); United States v. Ward,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011