Manuel Ayala, Jr., and Carol A. Ayala - Page 8




                                        - 7 -                                         
          business, must maintain two places of abode and, therefore, incur           
          additional living expenses.  Brandl v. Commissioner, 513 F.2d               
          697, 699 (6th Cir. 1975), affg. T.C. Memo. 1974-160; Kroll v.               
          Commissioner, supra at 562.  In other words, section 162(a)(2) is           
          intended to provide relief to a taxpayer who incurs “substantial            
          continuing expenses” of a home that are duplicated by business              
          travel.  See James v. United States, 308 F.2d 204, 207-208 (9th             
          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, petitioners bore no                   
          expenses in maintaining a home in addition to their travel                  
          trailer.  Notwithstanding their very real ties to California,               
          petitioners bore no duplicative living expenses.  They did not              
          make mortgage payments, pay regular utilities costs, or regularly           
          pay for running a household other than the one in which they                
          resided:  The travel trailer.  In other words, expenses incurred            
          in respect of the ancestral home in Vallejo were incurred for the           
          benefit of Mr. Ayala’s sister and not because of the exigencies             
          of Mr. Ayala’s business travel.  Make no mistake:  Petitioners’             
          financial support of Mr. Ayala’s sister was extremely laudable.             







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007