- 6 -
is not entitled to deduct any of the expenses relating to the use
of his personal residence. See Strohmaier v. Commissioner, 113
T.C. 106, 111 (1999); Krist v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-140;
Verma v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-132; Tokh v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2001-45, affd. 25 Fed. Appx. 440 (7th Cir. 2001).
The only other testimony petitioner gave was about legal
expenses. Petitioner testified that he incurred legal expenses
in a custody battle for his daughter. When the Court informed
petitioner that those legal expenses were not business expenses,
petitioner testified that he had also incurred legal expenses
when he had contracts and documents related to his speaking
engagements reviewed by an attorney. Petitioner failed to
provide the Court with any evidence of the amounts paid for these
legal expenses or any of the remaining expenses. In addition,
petitioner did not provide the Court with a basis from which we
could make any estimate under Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 540,
543-544 (2d Cir. 1930). Vanicek v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 731,
742-743 (1985); see Edwards v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-169;
Caralan Trust v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-241.
Therefore, we hold that petitioner is not entitled to
deduct any of the Schedule C expenses he claimed for 1999.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011