- 15 -
substantiation for the claimed deductions for Mrs. Harrell’s
travel in the course of her job search.
In addition to applying to traveling expenses, the strict
substantiation requirements of section 274 apply to deductions
with respect to “any listed property (as defined in section
280F(d)(4).” Section 280F(d)(4)(A)(v), in turn, includes “any
cellular telephone” in the definition of listed property. The
only substantiation petitioners submitted with respect to their
cellular telephone expenditures was a letter from Mr. Harrell’s
employer stating that Mr. Harrell used his cellular telephone to
communicate and conduct business with the company and that he was
not reimbursed for those charges. No substantiation was
introduced as to: (1) Specific telephone calls made using the
cellular telephone; (2) the portion of the use that might be
related to Mr. Harrell’s work (rather than to personal calls); or
(3) any other matter that would support a claim that the cellular
telephone was property used in Mr. Harrell’s trade or business of
performing services as an employee. We therefore sustain
respondent’s disallowance of this component of the claimed excess
unreimbursed employee and other miscellaneous expenses deduction.
Finally, petitioners deducted $125 for tax preparation fees.
Petitioners used a commercial software package to prepare their
2002 tax return. The record does not reveal the cost of the
software package, but we recognize that there in fact was a cost.
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