Jose Calvao - Page 4

                                        - 4 -                                         
          principal business or profession was professional gambling.                 
          Petitioner reported gross receipts of $132,800, cost of goods               
          sold of $180,300, and deducted $3,150 in travel expenses, for a             
          net Schedule C loss of $50,650.  After deducting the Schedule C             
          loss and a net operating loss carryover of $1,106, petitioner               
          reported total income of $113,723.  Petitioner claimed itemized             
          deductions of $14,077 and a personal exemption of $3,000,                   
          resulting in taxable income of $96,646 and total tax of $23,303.            
               On March 21, 2005, respondent issued petitioner a notice of            
          deficiency.  Respondent determined petitioner was not engaged in            
          the trade or business of gambling during 2002 and therefore could           
          not deduct his gambling losses on Schedule C.  Instead,                     
          respondent determined petitioner could deduct the gambling losses           
          as an itemized deduction, but only to the extent of his gambling            
          winnings.5  Based on the above, respondent determined the amount            
          of tax required to be shown on petitioner’s 2002 return was                 
          $40,399, resulting in a deficiency of $17,096.  Respondent also             
          determined petitioner was liable for an accuracy-related penalty            
          under section 6662(a) of $3,419.                                            
               In response to the notice of deficiency, petitioner filed              
          his petition with this Court on April 18, 2005.                             


               5  Respondent also disallowed the claimed personal exemption           
          deduction because petitioner’s adjusted gross income exceeded the           
          allowable amount for such a deduction.  Petitioner does not                 
          dispute this determination.                                                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011