- 11 -
trade or business expense incident to petitioner’s tutoring
activity.6 That said, we are left to decide whether petitioner’s
vehicle expense (or any portion thereof), the sole deduction
claimed by petitioner in respect of that activity, is allowable
under sections 162(a) and 274(d) and the pertinent regulations
thereunder.
At trial, petitioner introduced into evidence a “log”. This
document does not satisfy the strict substantiation requirements
imposed by law, as the following colloquy from trial clearly
demonstrates:
THE COURT: * * * What is the total of this
mileage?
PETITIONER: It’s not for the whole year. I
didn’t complete it. When I did my taxes, I just
estimated, okay, you know, the car was–
THE COURT: So you really just guessed what your
total mileage was?
PETITIONER: I didn’t finish it, sir. Like I
said, I didn’t do it for the whole year. As the year
went by, I got lazy. It was a lot of work writing,
writing that, and then I kind of, you know--as the year
went by, I think I wrote that for like maybe two
months.
6 Respondent has not sought to characterize petitioner’s
tutoring activity as an activity other than one entered into for
profit. Cf. sec. 183. Nor has respondent sought to characterize
petitioner’s status, vis-a-vis the tutoring activity, as other
than that of a sole proprietor.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008