- 37 -
be treated as those of Ms. Quinn, whether because of the duty of
consistency or because petitioners have failed to meet their
burden of proof in overcoming the basis for respondent’s
deficiency determinations.
As a consequence of the above; i.e., that transactions in
the E Trade account cannot be treated as those of Mr. Arberg, in
conjunction with the fact that petitioners have never contended
or proffered evidence to show that Mr. Arberg engaged in trading
through other accounts in 2000 or that Ms. Quinn was a trader in
securities, the Court need not probe further into the
qualifications for trader status. A priori, one to whom
particular securities transactions cannot be attributed cannot be
said to be in the business of trading those securities for his or
her own account. Section 475(f) trader status and attendant
ordinary loss treatment is thus unavailable in any event.
III. Expense Deductions
Deductions are a matter of “legislative grace”, and “a
taxpayer seeking a deduction must be able to point to an
applicable statute and show that he comes within its terms.” New
Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, 292 U.S. at 440; see also Rule
142(a). As a general rule, section 162(a) authorizes a deduction
for “all the ordinary and necessary expenses paid or incurred
during the taxable year in carrying on any trade or business”.
An expense is ordinary for purposes of this section if it is
Page: Previous 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007