Steven S. and Lisa J. Bogue - Page 14




                                       - 14 -                                         
          T.C. Memo. 2001-132.  Strict substantiation therefore does not              
          apply, and we may estimate the business portion of utility                  
          expenses under the Cohan rule.  See Pistoresi v. Commissioner,              
          T.C. Memo. 1999-39.                                                         
               Petitioners introduced copies of credit card statements                
          indicating that AOL charged petitioners $23.90 per month in 2003.           
          Petitioners failed to introduce evidence to show that Mr. Bogue’s           
          employer, NWA, required him to have Internet access or that he              
          used the Internet for his work at NWA.5  Petitioners are                    
          therefore not entitled to deduct any Internet access expenses as            
          employee business expenses for 2003.                                        
          Safety Glasses and Safety Shoes Expenses                                    
               Petitioners claimed $150 for safety glasses and $124 for               
          safety shoes for 2003.  A taxpayer is entitled to deduct                    
          unreimbursed employee expenses only to the extent that the                  
          taxpayer demonstrates that he or she could not have been                    
          reimbursed for such expenses by his or her employer.  Sec.                  
          162(a); Podems v. Commissioner, 24 T.C. 21, 23 (1955).                      
               Petitioners did not provide any documentation showing that             
          Mr. Bogue purchased safety glasses or safety shoes in 2003.                 


               5Mr. Bogue stated at trial that he used the Internet for job           
          searching during 2003.  Petitioners did not offer any evidence or           
          estimate to break down the cost attributable to job searching or            
          how much was for personal use, and we decline to speculate.  We             
          also note that respondent has conceded that petitioners are                 
          entitled to deduct $75 for job searching expenses.                          





Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007