Sandy Rowe v. Cir

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 20 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SANDY LEE ROWE; SYLVIA MARIE Nos. 21-71308
ROWE, 21-71310
Petitioners-Appellants, IRS Nos. 6432-20
7592-20
v.
MEMORANDUM*
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Respondent-Appellee.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
United States Tax Court
Submitted March 14, 2023**
Before: SILVERMAN, SUNG, and SANCHEZ, Circuit Judges.
Sandy Lee Rowe and Sylvia Marie Rowe appeal pro se from the Tax Court’s
decision, following a bench trial, upholding the Commissioner of Internal
Revenue’s determination of deficiencies for tax years 2017 and 2018. We have
jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We review for clear error the Tax
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Court’s determination that a taxpayer has not met his burden to substantiate a
deduction. Sparkman v. Comm’r, 509 F.3d 1149, 1159 (9th Cir. 2007). We
affirm.
The Tax Court did not clearly err in determining that the Rowes failed to
produce sufficient evidence to demonstrate their entitlement to claimed deductions
related to business expenses for tax years 2017 and 2018. See Norgaard v.
Comm’r, 939 F.2d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1991) (the taxpayer carries the burden of
establishing entitlement to a deduction); see also 26 U.S.C. § 162(a) (permitting
deduction of certain “ordinary and necessary” business expenses); id. § 274(d)
(setting forth substantiation requirements for claimed deductions for travel,
entertainment, and meal expenses). Contrary to the Rowes’ contention, the Tax
Court did not err by requiring them to justify their business expenses for tax year
2018, as they admitted they were seeking a deduction for business expenses rather
than their initial request for a qualified business income deduction.
We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued
in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.
2 21-71308
21-71310