- 19 -
of deficiency (notice) with respect to their taxable years 2000,
2001, and 2002. In that notice, respondent, inter alia, deter-
mined to disallow the deductions of $10,182, $14,948, and $13,961
that petitioners claimed in the 2000 Schedule F, the 2001 Sched-
ule F, and the 2002 Schedule F, respectively, for “Employee
benefit programs” because “it has not been established that these
amounts were ordinary and necessary business expenses, or were
expended for the purpose designated.” In the notice, respondent
also determined to allow petitioners deductions of $6,109,
$8,969, and $9,773 for their taxable years 2000, 2001, and 2002,
respectively, for “Self-Employed Health Insurance” because “you
are allowed the deduction for self-employed health insurance
premiums.”
OPINION
We first address section 7491(a). The parties agree that
section 7491(a) is applicable in the instant case. The parties
disagree over whether the burden of proof has shifted to respon-
dent under that section. We need not, and we shall not, address
that disagreement. That is because resolution of the issue
presented here does not depend on who has the burden of proof.
We turn now to whether petitioners are entitled to deduct
under section 162(a) certain amounts in excess of the amounts
conceded by respondent for “Employee benefit programs” that
petitioners claimed in the 2000 Schedule F, the 2001 Schedule F,
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008