- 6 -
Cir. 1962); Kroll v. Commissioner, supra at 562. When a taxpayer
continuously travels for work and does not have substantial,
duplicative, continuous living expenses for a permanent home
maintained for some business reason, the taxpayer has no tax
home. Henderson v. Commissioner, 143 F.3d 497, 499 (9th Cir.
1998), affg. T.C. Memo. 1995-559; James v. United States, supra.
Most significantly in this case, petitioner bore no expenses
in maintaining a home. Notwithstanding his visits to his
family’s home in California and financial contributions during
those periodic visits, petitioner bore no duplicative living
expenses. He did not make mortgage payments, pay regular
utilities costs, or regularly pay for running a household.
Petitioner’s costs on the road, while they may have been
substantial, were not redundant, and thus petitioner was not
“away from home” within the intent and meaning of section
162(a)(2) for the taxable years at issue. Barone v.
Commissioner, supra at 465; Wirth v. Commissioner, 61 T.C. 855,
858-859 (1974). In short, petitioner’s tax home was wherever he
happened to be. See Brandl v. Commissioner, supra. Accordingly,
petitioner is not entitled to deduct the expenses claimed on his
returns for the years at issue.
B. Section 6662(a)
Section 6662(a) imposes a penalty equal to 20 percent of the
amount of any underpayment attributable to negligence or
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007