- 7 -
Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992); New Colonial Ice
Co. v. Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934).
With these well-established propositions in mind, we must
determine whether petitioners have satisfied their burden of
proving that they are entitled to the claimed itemized deductions
mentioned above.
1. Miscellaneous Itemized Deductions
As previously stated, on their Schedule A for taxable year
2002, petitioners claimed miscellaneous itemized deductions of
$28,188 for job expenses incurred during taxable year 2002. The
deduction was claimed for expenses incurred relating to
petitioner’s travel between his residence in Moorefield, West
Virginia, and construction/work sites in Baltimore, Maryland,
Arlington, Virginia, Union Bridge, Maryland, and Annapolis,
Maryland. Respondent disallowed the deductions in full.
Respondent determined that petitioners did not substantiate the
claimed expenses or, if substantiated, petitioners did not prove
that the expenses were not reimbursed by petitioner’s employer;
nor did petitioners prove that Moorefield, West Virginia, was
petitioner’s tax home.
Section 162(a) allows a deduction for ordinary and necessary
business expenses paid or incurred during the taxable year in
carrying on any trade or business. For an expense to be
“ordinary” the transaction that gives rise to the expense must be
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011