- 17 -
States as “Management”, not engineering. Therefore, at the time
she filed her 2002 Federal income tax return, she knew where and
in what capacity she would be working after graduation.
Petitioner has not produced any evidence that she provided any,
let alone all, of the pertinent details of her employment before
and after her M.B.A. to her tax return preparer.11
Petitioner has not shown that she acted in good faith in
deducting her M.B.A. expenses, that she had reasonable cause for
her position, or that she expended any effort in trying to assess
the proper tax treatment for these expenses. Petitioner has
failed to carry her burden under Rule 142(a) to introduce
persuasive evidence that respondent’s determination is incorrect.
See Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. at 446.
11 As noted supra, petitioner chose not to appear at trial.
Had petitioner appeared, she might have been able to provide the
specific facts she actually related to her return preparer to
enable that professional to conduct a properly informed analysis.
At trial, petitioner’s counsel stated that petitioner had not
been offered the position in marketing at Refreshment Brands,
Inc. at that time in 2003. The record reflects, however, that
she had not only received but also accepted the job offer when
she filed her 2002 tax return. Counsel then argued that even if
petitioner had reviewed the Code, regulations, Internal Revenue
Service publications, and the relevant cases, she would not have
reached a conclusion different from her tax return preparer’s or
been better able to reach the correct result than they. This
argument asks the Court to assume the very facts that petitioner
must prove to demonstrate that she acted with reasonable cause
and in good faith.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008