- 11 -
did not maintain a mileage log, and he did not attempt to
reconstruct his auto expenses (i.e., by tying his clients’
business cards, which he did possess, to particular dates). The
Court finds that petitioner has satisfied neither the strict
substantiation requirements of section 274(d) nor the predominant
use requirement. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to
expense the cost of the Jeep under section 179. Accordingly,
respondent’s determination is sustained.
E. Expenses for Business Use of the Home
Expenses for the business use of a taxpayer’s residence are
deductible only under very limited circumstances. The taxpayer
must show that a portion of the residence was exclusively used on
a regular basis as his principal place of business, and in the
case of an employee, the exclusive use must be for the employer’s
convenience. See sec. 280A(c)(1). The term “a portion of the
dwelling unit” refers to “a room or other separately identifiable
space;” a permanent partition marking off the area is not
necessary. Sec. 1.280A-2(g)(1), Proposed Income Tax Regs., 48
Fed. Reg. 33324 (July 21, 1983).3 When section 280A(c) was added
to the Internal Revenue Code by the Tax Reform Act of 1976, Pub.
3 Although proposed regulations carry no greater weight
than a position advanced on brief by the Commissioner, they may
be useful as guidelines where they closely follow the legislative
history of the act. Estate of Wallace v. Commissioner, 95 T.C.
525, 547 (1990), affd. 965 F.2d 1038 (11th Cir. 1992); Miller v.
Commissioner, 70 T.C. 448, 460 (1978); F.W. Woolworth Co. v.
Commissioner, 54 T.C. 1233, 1265-1266 (1970)).
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008