DocketNumber: Docket No. 8091-81.
Filed Date: 12/15/1983
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/20/2020
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
COHEN,
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts have been stipulated, and the stipulation of facts is incorporated herein by this reference. Petitioner was a resident of Alaska at the time his petition herein was filed.
Petitioner is a registered professional engineer and performs engineering services as an employee of or consultant to various companies. For some time prior to the year in issue, he maintained a home in Vail, Colorado, and from there he traveled to various consulting jobs in other states. 1983 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 39">*41 In 1975, for example, he was employed in Pennsylvania as a consultant for Westinghouse Corporation. In relation to that employment, he was allowed by Westinghouse $600 a month for living expenses, and he submitted expense reports in relation to that allowance to his employer. During 1976, he completed his work in Pennsylvania and returned to Colorado. When certain business ventures in Colorado were not successful, petitioner decided to attempt to secure consulting work in Alaska. On his 1977 income tax return, petitioner claimed $7,200 as living expenses, calculating that amount by multiplying the figure of $600 per month by 12 months.
On or about August 9, 1977, petitioner, as lessee, entered into a 3-year lease of two hunting camps in Alaska. He paid $6,000 as consideration for that lease. Thereafter, during 1977, he incurred various expenses in relation to the hunting camps, including "set-up work that was required, cleaning up the camps and making them ready." Although he had several customers that were awaiting the camps' opening, he did not have any paying customers during 1977 or thereafter. By 1979, his efforts to operate the hunting camps had been interfered with1983 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 39">*42 or prevented by conversion of various areas of Alaska to National Parks.
OPINION
In general, the taxpayer's tax home for purposes of the travel expense deduction of
Petitioner has not sustained his burden of proving that he was away from home and therefore entitled to deduct his living expenses under
With respect to petitioner's expenses for development of the hunting camps, his testimony shows that they were in the nature of setup or "preopening expenses" and were not deductible during 1977 because the camps had not opened for business.
1. Unless otherwise indicated, all statutory references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended and in effect during the years in issue.↩
2. See also
3. Similarly, we need not consider the effect of section 195, permitting amorization of certain startup expenditures, effective in taxable years ending after July 29, 1980.↩
William F. Sanford v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue ( 1969 )
Dale W. Folkman and Judy A. Folkman v. United States of ... ( 1980 )
Bennett Paper Corporation and Subsidiaries v. Commissioner ... ( 1983 )
Donald P. Kasun and Joyce J. Kasun v. United States ( 1982 )