- 11 - do not evidence business engagement. Indus. Research Prods., Inc. v. Commissioner, 40 T.C. 578 (1963). In Evan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-180, the Court disallowed deductions claimed for Schedule C business expenses where the only income realized was from an employment relationship and not from a Schedule C trade or business. The Court rejects petitioner’s argument that his salary from the V.A. should be aggregated or attributed to his Schedule C activities as a counterargument to respondent’s determination that, because there was no trade or business income, the expenses related thereto are not deductible. Petitioners cited no authority to support this argument. Petitioner was an employee of the V.A., and, as such, his wages or salary were subject to a treatment different from income from or losses from a self- employed trade or business activity. As an employee with the V.A., he was issued Forms W-2, Wage and Tax Statement, which reflected deductions for Social Security taxes and other deductions that would not be applicable in a self-employed activity. The Court, therefore, rejects that argument. An employer-employee relationship is not a self-employment activity. The Court finally considers whether petitioners are entitled to deductions for job search expenses. Such expenses were claimed by petitioner as Schedule C trade or business expenses. However, it is obvious, as noted earlier, that, if petitioner wasPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011