- 18 -
use Mr. Riley’s cellular phone for business purposes in addition
to those they would have incurred had he used it only for
personal purposes. Moreover, petitioners did not prove that NWA
required Mr. Riley to have a cellular phone. Petitioners are
therefore not entitled to deduct any cellular phone expenses as
employee business expenses for 2003.
Equipment Expenses
Petitioners claimed $1,106 of equipment expenses for the
purchase of a computer. Computers and peripheral equipment are
“listed property” and are therefore subject to the strict
substantiation requirements. Sec. 280F(d)(4)(A)(iv).
Petitioners introduced a $1,069 receipt from Dell for a
computer they ordered in August 2003, after Mr. Riley had been in
Newark for 3 months.8 Petitioners have not proven that Mr.
Riley’s employer required him to purchase and use the computer
for his work at NWA. Moreover, the computer remained in the
Wisconsin residence while Mr. Riley was working in Newark. We
find that the evidence petitioners introduced on this issue does
not satisfy the strict substantiation requirements. Accordingly,
petitioners are not entitled to deduct any of the equipment costs
for the computer.
8Petitioners introduced no evidence to explain the $37
difference between the amount of equipment expenses they claimed
and the amount shown on the receipt from Dell.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007