Turner v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
P was furnished with a house by, and for the convenience of, his employer, but P had to purchase utilities, carpeting, and a heater, for which he was not reimbursed. Held, the utilities, carpeting, and heater were not furnished by the employer within the meaning of sec. 119, I.R.C. 1954, and hence, their cost is not excludable from income under that provision.
1Opinion of the Court
Simpson, Judge:
The Commissioner determined a deficiency in the petitioners’ 1972 Federal income tax in the amount of $184.98. The only issue for decision is whether the petitioner may exclude or deduct from income under section 119, I.R.C. 1954,1 the amounts he paid for utilities, carpeting, and a heater for a home furnished for the convenience of his employer.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts have been stipulated, and those facts are so found.
The petitioners, George A. Turner and Marjorie M. Turner, husband and wife, resided in California when they filed their timely petition herein. They…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. Richard D. Morelan and Margaret Morelan, United States of America v. Karl W. ChristeyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1966
- Olkjer v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1959
- United States v. Daniel F. Barrett and Margaret G. Barrett Edgar B. Garner and Evelyn T. GarnerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1963
- J. Melvin Boykin v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1958
- Ralph A. Wilson and Joanne B. Wilson, His Wife v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1969
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Benninghoff v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1978
- Hill v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2010
- Harrison v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1981
- Benninghoff v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1978
- Derksen v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.