Robert A. White - Page 19
- 18 -
Absent some documentary evidence that petitioner actually
repaired any shoes in 2003 notwithstanding his shoe allowance, we
do not accept petitioner’s testimony as a reasonable basis to
estimate his shoe repair expenses. Respondent’s determination as
to the claimed shoe expense deduction is sustained.
Petitioner claimed a deduction of $215 for haircuts in 2003.
Petitioner testified that he paid $60 per month for haircuts and
that his return preparer advised him that, since DHS and the
military require petitioner to be well groomed, his weekly
haircuts were deductible.
Grooming remains an inherently personal expense and is not
deductible, regardless of whether an employer requires a
particularly neat appearance. Hynes v. Commissioner, supra at
1291-1292. Respondent’s determination as to the claimed haircut
expense deduction is sustained.
Petitioner claimed a deduction of $525 for supplies but at
trial testified that the only supply expenses he incurred in 2003
were those related to his job search (discussed above). He was
unable to explain how his return preparer came up with the $525
supplies expense figure. Respondent’s determination as to the
claimed supplies expense deduction is sustained.
Page: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Last modified: March 27, 2008