Case law

Knauss v. Comm'r

89 T.C.M. 668 · United States Tax Court · Jan 18, 2005

First, to qualify for the Cohan rule, a taxpayer must show that some expenditure in fact occurred and only its precise amount lacks direct proof. See Cohan v. … Coast Guard certificate of inspection, qualified by minor deficiencies, was issued at the same time.

Wilhelm v. Commissioner

37 T.C.M. 1354 · United States Tax Court · Aug 17, 1978

The term charitable contribution is defined as a contribution or gift to or for the use of certain qualified charities. Sec. 170(c) . … Clearly, the registration fees and dues do not qualify as a charitable contribution because they were made for the benefit of petitioner's daughter. See Winters v.

Estate of Wedum v. Commissioner

51 T.C.M. 1225 · United States Tax Court · Jun 18, 1986

The residue of decedent's estate passed to the Wedum Foundation, a qualified charitable organization. … The facts in Byrum, however, are clearly distinguishable from those in the instant case. Mr. Byrum created an inter vivos trust to which he transferred shares of stock in three closely-held corporations.

Syracuse v. Commissioner

42 T.C.M. 288 · United States Tax Court · Jun 30, 1981

The factors enumerated above which indicate that petitioner was engaged in the landfill business more than adequately establish that petitioner was engaged in that business on his own account and not on behalf of the DeMaltie … See . *417 In , the Supreme Court stated that: * * * in determining whether a bad debt has a "proximate" relation to the taxpayer's trade or business, as the Regulations specify, and thus qualifies as a business bad debt,

Rosenthal v. Comm'r

87 T.C.M. 1183 · United States Tax Court · Mar 26, 2004

In certain situations, however, a joint return filer can avoid such joint and several liability by qualifying for relief therefrom under section 6015. … Respondent argues that petitioner failed to establish that she suffered “economic hardship” (a negative factor under Rev.

Johnson v. Commissioner

39 T.C.M. 868 · United States Tax Court · Jan 15, 1980

It is well established that a taxpayer does not qualify as "head of household" unless he maintains as his home the household in which his dependents reside. Manning v. Commissioner, supra ; Williams v. … Clearly under such circumstances petitioner is not entitled to a deduction for real estate taxes paid on the property at 41 Hazelton Circle.

Liberty Asphalt Corp. v. Commissioner

49 T.C.M. 1048 · United States Tax Court · Mar 27, 1985

Frederick retained counsel, and was ultimately granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for his cooperation with investigating authorities. Later, Mr. … Such conduct, the likely effect of which would be to mislead or to conceal their true activities from the taxing authorities, is clearly evidence of the Fredericks' fraudulent conduct during the taxable years in issue. .

Landsberger v. Commissioner

47 T.C.M. 208 · United States Tax Court · Oct 31, 1983

The evidence herein clearly demonstrates that petitioner fully controlled the earning of his income from employment as a professional basketball player. … not qualify for deduction under section 212.

Cox v. Commissioner

50 T.C.M. 317 · United States Tax Court · Jul 2, 1985

Petitioner was granted partial immunity from prosecution in exchange for his testimony in the criminal proceedings. … He has not established petitioners' opening net worth with reasonable *330 certainty.

Terence J. Keating & Janet D. Keating

United States Tax Court · Jan 4, 2024

Kotch was qualified to discuss or underwrite insurance risks. Mr. … Section 1(h)(11) provides preferential tax rates for “qualified dividend income” if the dividend is received from a domestic corporation or a qualified foreign corporation.

Bowers v. Commissioner

51 T.C.M. 1337 · United States Tax Court · Jul 3, 1986

The existence of an underpayment for the year in issue is therefore clearly established. What remains for our decision is whether any part of the underpayment for the year in issue was due to fraud. … In our judgment, these facts as well as those set forth above clearly and convincingly establish fraud with intent to evade tax.

Watson Electrical Constr. Co. v. Commissioner

35 T.C.M. 8 · United States Tax Court · Jan 7, 1976

Clearly the petitioner has failed to meet the "primary use" test of section 274(a)(1)(B) for 1972. … Section 274(a) is applicable to the facts here and is determinative unless the petitioner qualifies under one of the exceptions to section 274(e). It does not so qualify.

Venable v. Comm'r

86 T.C.M. 254 · United States Tax Court · Aug 13, 2003

Schleier, supra at 336-337, established a two- pronged test for ascertaining a taxpayer’s eligibility for the section 104(a)(2) exclusion. … Since no citizen enjoys immunity from that burden, its retroactive imposition does not necessarily infringe due process * * * ” [Id. at 33 (quoting Welch v.

Cioffi v. Commissioner

40 T.C.M. 536 · United States Tax Court · Jun 25, 1980

Clearly such income is ordinary income in respect to services. Section 61, section 1222. But even if Mr. … Petitioners did not report any of this gain on their 1973 return, although he did not qualify for any exclusion therefor. Clearly, therefore, we must hold for respondent on this issue.

Estate of Hogard v. Commissioner

73 T.C.M. 2552 · United States Tax Court · Apr 8, 1997

Although Stewart visited the PI plant in Hyannis and observed a demonstration of the recycler, he was not qualified to analyze or assess the recyclers on display or the facility. … Their subjective intent does not excuse them from the consequences of claiming deductions and credits to which under the circumstances they were clearly not entitled. See Klieger v. Commissioner, T.C.

Wal-Mart Stores v. Commissioner

73 T.C.M. 1625 · United States Tax Court · Jan 2, 1997

Both of these witnesses were qualified as experts for the sole purpose of rebuttal. Dr. Bates was recognized as an expert on tax accounting for purposes of rebutting Dr. Fienberg. … reflect income more clearly.

Willis v. Comm'r

86 T.C.M. 506 · United States Tax Court · Nov 3, 2003

Petitioners clearly had some ability to make payments toward the cumulative liability. As a result, petitioners were not eligible to have the cumulative liability classified as CNC. … Further, particularly in light of the unresolved question relating to ownership of the real estate, petitioners have failed to establish that they would qualify for treatment under respondent’s new policy.

Lajtha v. Commissioner

20 T.C.M. 1426 · United States Tax Court · Sep 29, 1961

The respondent is apprehensive of possible claims which may arise from confiscation of American-owned property in Cuba and therefore urges that claims of this nature should not be allowed unless clearly proved by competent … A witness who was a qualified real estate appraiser and architect, was familiar with real estate market conditions in Budapest from 1938 to 1946 and familiar with this property, and who is now a licensed architect in New

Lovlien v. Commissioner

50 T.C.M. 1277 · United States Tax Court · Oct 7, 1985

It is well established that the documents which petitioner tendered to the Commissioner did not qualify as a return and that what *115 appeared thereon as his reasons for not filing a return or for not paying tax are utterly … Clearly, the facts now in the record sufficiently support the section 6651(a)(1) and 6653(a) additions to tax.

Foster v. Commissioner

57 T.C.M. 661 · United States Tax Court · Jun 7, 1989

The evidence clearly establishes that Mr. Whitfield received income as the result of his embezzlement scheme which was not reported. Mr. … In order to qualify for innocent spouse relief, Ms.