- 5 - Petitioners’ Return Petitioners claimed deductions for certain expenses on Schedule A, Itemized Deductions, on their joint return for 2003. Respondent examined petitioners’ return for 2003 and issued petitioners a deficiency notice in which he disallowed many of the expense deductions. Of the expenses still in dispute,4 petitioners assert they are entitled to deduct unreimbursed employee expenses related to Mr. Riley’s NWA mechanic job. The unreimbursed employee business expenses petitioners claimed include $5,596 of vehicle expenses, $38 of travel expenses, and $3,162 of meals5 while Mr. Riley worked in Newark. The unreimbursed employee business expenses also include the following non-travel related expenses: $296 for depreciation of tools, $75 of Internet expenses, $960 of cellular telephone expenses, $1,106 of equipment expenses, $80 for safety glasses, $102 for safety shoes, and $822 for maintenance of uniforms. 4Respondent concedes that petitioners are entitled to deduct State and local income taxes, real estate taxes, home mortgage interest, gifts to charity, tax preparation fees and a portion of the union dues claimed on the return for 2003. Petitioners concede the deductions claimed for miscellaneous supplies, costs of tools, investment fees, IRA fees, and $4 of the $708 union dues. 5The gross amount of meals expenses petitioners claimed on the return is $4,864. Petitioners multiplied the meals expenses by 65 percent, the applicable percentage allowable only for employees subject to Department of Transportation hours of service limits (DOT percentage). Sec. 274(n)(3). We need not decide whether petitioners are entitled to use the DOT percentage as Mr. Riley was not away from home.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NextLast modified: November 10, 2007