Brett Alan Combs - Page 5

                                        - 4 -                                         
          “shall be allocated or apportioned to sources within or without             
          the United States, under regulations prescribed by the                      
          Secretary.”  Petitioner admits, and the facts show, that he had             
          no items of gross income, expenses, losses, and deductions other            
          than those from a U.S. source.                                              
               From the items of U.S. source gross income, the taxpayer               
          “shall” deduct the expenses, losses, and other deductions                   
          properly apportioned or allocated to U.S. source income along               
          with a ratable portion of expenses, losses, and other deductions            
          that cannot definitely be allocated to an item or class of gross            
          income.  Sec. 861(b).  The standard deduction is considered a               
          deduction that cannot definitely be allocated to an item or class           
          of gross income.  Sec. 861(b).  The remainder, if any, after                
          taking the above expenses, losses, and other deductions, is                 
          included in full as U.S. source taxable income.  Sec. 861(b).               
               Because 100 percent of petitioner’s gross income is U.S.               
          source gross income, 100 percent of petitioner’s expenses,                  
          losses, and other deductions are properly allocated and                     
          “apportioned” to U.S. source income.  The thoughtful reader need            
          go no further than the words of the statute to determine that               
          section 861 is unnecessary to the determination of petitioner’s             
          income tax liability.                                                       
               Petitioner, however, claimed at trial to be confused by the            
          terms “classes of gross income” and “statutory groupings”.  The             






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

Last modified: May 25, 2011