- 15 -
circumstances presented here, we are not required to, and
generally do not, rely on petitioner’s testimony to sustain his
burden of establishing error in respondent’s determinations. See
Lerch v. Commissioner, supra at 631-632; Geiger v. Commissioner,
supra at 689-690; Tokarski v. Commissioner, supra at 77.
We shall not rely on the Cohan rule as petitioner has not
presented sufficient evidence to establish a rational basis for
making an estimate. Accordingly, we conclude that petitioner has
failed to establish that he paid any mortgage interest on a house
other than his house in Monument, Colorado.
Petitioner testified that he borrowed against a life
insurance policy to pay “home mortgage interest” during 2000.
Petitioner further testified that he borrowed this money for a
downpayment on a house and the company that lent him this money
did not place a mortgage on the house.
Section 163(h)(1) generally disallows a deduction for
personal interest. An exception to this rule is “qualified
residence interest”. Sec. 163(h)(2)(D). Qualified residence
interest includes “acquisition indebtedness” and “home equity
indebtedness”. Sec. 163(h)(3)(A). Acquisition indebtedness and
home equity indebtedness must be secured by a residence. Sec.
163(h)(3)(B)(i)(II) and (C)(i).
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