Jin Xiong - Page 10

                                        - 9 -                                         
          1990-483.  Therefore, we hold that petitioner’s use of his home             
          for his book writing project does not qualify it as a home                  
               Consistent with his treatment of a portion of his home as a            
          home office, petitioner claimed an $8,585 deduction for the use             
          of his passenger vehicle for business travel and transportation.            
          The claimed “travel expense” consisted of expenses petitioner               
          incurred in driving from his home to various libraries in the               
          State in order to gather material for his book, as well as the              
          expenses he incurred in driving from his home to his office at              
          the university.  Even were we to hold that petitioner’s book                
          writing project was a separate business activity and that                   
          petitioner maintained a home office, the deduction for these                
          claimed driving expenses would not be allowable because those               
          claimed deductions have not been adequately substantiated.                  
               In general, all ordinary and necessary expenses paid or                
          incurred in carrying on a trade or business during the taxable              
          year are deductible.  Sec. 162(a).  An expense is considered                
          ordinary for these purposes if it is normal or customary within a           

               5Even were we to hold that petitioner’s book writing project           
          was separate from his employment as a university professor,                 
          petitioner would still not be entitled to the claimed home office           
          deduction because sec. 280A(c)(5) would limit the amount of the             
          home office deduction to the amount of income produced from the             
          book.  The parties do not dispute that in 2003, the tax year in             
          issue, petitioner had not yet written the book and therefore did            
          not have any income from the book writing project.                          

Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007