Carter v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
1. Held, amounts paid as a fee to an employment agency and for related expenses incurred in seeking employment are not deductible under sec. 162(a), I.R.C. 1954. 2. Held, further, none of the activities carried on in petitioners' residence constituted a trade or business, and accordingly no part of the cost of maintaining their residence is deductible under sec. 162(a), I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
Featherston, Judge:
Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioners’ income tax for 1964 in the amount of $221.50. The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioners are entitled to deduct a fee paid to an employment agency, and related expenditures, as ordinary and necessary business expenses under section 162(a);1 and (2) what part, if any, of the cost of maintaining petitioners’ residence is deductible under section 162(a) as a business expense or under section 212(1) as an expense for the production of income.
findings of fact
Eugene A. Carter (hereinafter petitioner) and Clarice E.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Automobile Club of Mich. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Dixon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- McDonald v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Frank v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1953
- Podems v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1955
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Primuth v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970
- Green v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1972
- Cremona v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1972
- Estate of Rockefeller v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1984
- Murphy v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1989
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.