- 13 -
receiving her M.B.A.; rather, her M.B.A. qualifies her for the
trade or business of business management. Likewise, petitioner
has not proven that her engineering roles included marketing
duties; yet, her position as vice president of marketing
indicates that she was so qualified after the M.B.A.8
We conclude that petitioner’s education expenses are
properly considered personal or capital expenditures not only
because the M.B.A. met the minimum education requirements of her
position at Refreshment Brands but also because the M.B.A.
qualified her for a new trade or business. Personal expenses are
nondeductible under section 262, and capital expenditures are
nondeductible under section 263. On the record before the Court,
even though petitioner remained in the beverage industry, her HBS
education significantly changed her role in that industry, and
that change compels the conclusion that she may not deduct those
expenses. Respondent’s determination is sustained.
8 As indicated, this case was tried in Boston, Mass.,
pursuant to petitioner’s designation. Petitioner’s counsel
presented the case at trial without petitioner’s testimony and
attempted to prove the case through various documents. The Court
sustained respondent’s authenticity and hearsay objections to
most of the documents petitioner’s counsel sought to introduce.
As a result of her failure to testify, the Court is left with a
limited record. See supra note 2. It would have been most
helpful if petitioner had provided an explanation of her duties
before and after receiving the M.B.A. See McIlvoy v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1979-248; see also Hudgens v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-33.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008