Steve J. Work - Page 14

                                       - 14 -                                         
          interest” ($1,877.96) plus the a loan origination fee ($611.50)             
          plus the broker discount ($2,446) equals $4,935.46.  The $5.46              
          difference is probably attributable to the declining amount of              
          interest charged as the principal of the mortgage was paid down.            
          Accordingly, we conclude that the settlement statement is                   
          insufficient evidence to allow petitioner a deduction greater               
          than the $4,930 respondent allowed.                                         
               Petitioner testified that he paid mortgage interest on a               
          house other than the house he purchased in Monument, Colorado.              
          Petitioner presented no documentary evidence to support this                
          assertion.                                                                  
               When a taxpayer establishes that he has incurred deductible            
          expenses but is unable to substantiate the exact amounts, we can            
          estimate the deductible amounts, but only if the taxpayer                   
          presents sufficient evidence to establish a rational basis for              
          making the estimates.  See Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 540,              
          543-544 (2d Cir. 1930); Vanicek v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 731,               
          742-743 (1985).  In estimating the amounts allowable, we bear               
          heavily upon the taxpayer whose inexactitude is of his own                  
          making.  See Cohan v. Commissioner, supra at 544.                           
               Petitioner relies on his own testimony.  The Court is not              
          required to accept petitioner’s unsubstantiated testimony.  See             
          Wood v. Commissioner, supra at 605.  We found petitioner’s                  
          testimony to be general, vague, and conclusory.  Under the                  






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011