- 19 -
Cochran conducted a thorough review of the documentation
submitted to her by petitioners. Petitioners acknowledged that
they had no “extraordinary health issues” yet claimed monthly
health care expenses of $1,103. Cochran reviewed the Form 433-A
and found that petitioners’ only documented health-related
expense was a monthly long-term care insurance premium of $182.
Nonetheless, she allowed petitioners a monthly health care
expense of $300. Although petitioners believe that Cochran’s
calculation should have reflected increased medical expenses in
the 48-month period and thereafter, we do not agree. See Fargo
v. Commissioner, 447 F.3d at 710 (it is not an abuse of
discretion to disregard claimed medical expenses that are
speculative or not related to the taxpayer). Moreover, besides
their health care expenses, Cochran gave petitioners the benefit
of the doubt in other instances as well. For example, she
accepted petitioners’ claimed values of their vehicles even
though they provided no substantiation of this and also claimed
that some of their vehicles had either no or de minimis value.
Cochran also accepted petitioners’ valuation of their real estate
and mobile home even though they obtained these values from tax
assessments and the fair market value of these properties could
have been higher. Although Cochran made some adjustments to some
of petitioners’ claimed expenses, she did so in accordance with
the Commissioner’s national and local guidelines and after
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011