- 13 -
presented to him, and the Court finds his testimony credible.
Therefore, as above, petitioners failed to properly substantiate
their car and truck expenses.
As for petitioners’ office expenses and utilities, their
personal residence is listed on the Schedules C for both
activities as the business address. Petitioners offered no
documentation or testimony showing they were entitled to
deductions for a home office, nor was any evidence offered to
substantiate the deductions for either year. Therefore, the
claimed deductions are disallowed in their entirety.
Finally, petitioners claimed supplies deductions for 1994
and 1995. Ms. Rhodes offered scant documentation supporting
these particular business expenses but submitted a few receipts
that were purportedly signed by her upline distributor, Kelli
Kaufman. Ms. Kaufman, however, denied it was her signature on
those receipts. Some of the receipts Ms. Rhodes alleged were
signed by Ms. Kaufman are dated after Ms. Kaufman ceased
participating in Amway. In light of the other false
documentation Ms. Rhodes presented, the Court finds Ms. Kaufman’s
testimony credible and finds that all documents submitted by
petitioners in support of their Amway expenses are false.
Petitioners are not entitled to the deductions for the expenses
claimed on their return relating to this activity.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011