- 29 - 162(a) certain amounts35 in excess of the amounts conceded by respondent for “Employee benefit programs” that petitioners claimed in the 2000 Schedule F, the 2001 Schedule F, and the 2002 Schedule F, respectively.36 We have considered all of the parties’ contentions and arguments that are not discussed herein, and we find them to be without merit, irrelevant, and/or moot.37 To reflect the foregoing and the concessions of respondent, Decision will be entered under Rule 155. 35See supra note 33. 36Cf. Albers v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-144. Unlike the instant case, in Albers, the fully stipulated record did not establish that Darwin J. Albers (Mr. Albers), as the employer of Peggy L. Albers (Ms. Albers), paid, directly or indirectly, to Ms. Albers pursuant to the AgriPlan/AgriBiz medical reimbursement plan involved in that case the medical expenses at issue there in order to reimburse her for expenses incurred or paid for the medical care of herself, her spouse Mr. Albers, and/or her dependent children. Nor did the fully stipulated record in that case establish why the payment by the taxpayers of the claimed medical expenses qualified those expenses as ordinary and neces- sary expenses paid or incurred by Mr. Albers in carrying on his farming business. 37In light of our findings and holdings herein, we reject respondent’s argument on brief and determinations in the notice that the insurance premiums at issue are subject to sec. 162(l).Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29Last modified: March 27, 2008