Kevin J. and Crystal A. Shoemaker - Page 18

                                       - 17 -                                         
         Claimed Meal Expenses                                                        
              In general, expenses paid or incurred for a taxpayer’s daily            
         meals while the taxpayer is not away from home within the meaning            
         of section 162(a)(2) are not deductible.  See United States v.               
         Correll, supra; Barry v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 1210, 1214 (1970),            
         affd. per curiam 435 F.2d 1290 (1st Cir. 1970).                              
              Petitioners concede, and we have found, that during 2002 Mr.            
         Shoemaker did not stay overnight at his claimed job site loca-               
         tions but instead returned in the evenings to petitioners’ resi-             
         dence in Keyser.  Petitioners do not contend, and the record does            
         not establish, that during 2002 Mr. Shoemaker’s daily roundtrips             
         between petitioners’ residence and his claimed job site locations            
         required him to stop for sleep or a substantial period of rest.              
         See United States v. Correll, supra; Strohmaier v. Commissioner,             
         113 T.C. at 115.                                                             
              On the instant record, we find that petitioners have failed             
         to carry their burden of establishing that during 2002 the meal              
         expenses that petitioners claim Mr. Shoemaker incurred while                 
         traveling from petitioners’ residence to his claimed job site                

              15(...continued)                                                        
          of petitioners’ automobile for which they claim a deduction for             
          2002.  On the record before us, we find that petitioners have               
          failed to carry their burden of establishing all of the elements            
          that they must prove in order to satisfy the requirements under             
          sec. 274(d) applicable to the claimed expenses relating to Mr.              
          Shoemaker’s use of petitioners’ automobile.  See sec. 1.274-                
          5T(b)(6), Temporary Income Tax Regs., 50 Fed. Reg. 46016 (Nov. 6,           
          1985).                                                                      




Page:  Previous  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011