Gilmore v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Held, that expenses for tuition, supervisory consultation, and travel expenses in relation to training and qualification to become a psychoanalyst incurred in 1956 and 1957 by Helen R. Gilmore, a practicing psychiatrist, are not deductible as business expenses within the meaning of section 162 of the Code of 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
Fisher, Judge:
Respondent determined deficiencies in income taxes of petitioners in the amounts of $607.61 and $946.48, respectively, for the taxable years 1956 and 1957.
Grant Gilmore, husband of Helen R. Gilmore, is a party only because he and his wife filed joint returns for the years in question. The issues before us relate solely to the activities of Helen R. Gilmore who will be referred to herein as petitioner.
The issues presented involve the question of whether or not expenses for tuition, supervisory consultation, and travel expenses incurred by petitioner, a practicing psychiatrist, in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Arnold Namrow and Lillian Namrow, and Jay C. Maxwell and Dorothy N. Maxwell v. Commissioner of Internal RevnueCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1961
- Namrow v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1959
3Cited by10 opinions
- Ramon M. Greenberg v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1966
- Voigt v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1980
- Greenberg v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1966
- Markham v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1965
- Frazee v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1963
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.