Haines v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
P's leg was seriously broken. He constructed a swimming pool at his home and exercised the leg in the pool to rebuild its strength. Held: P failed to establish that his expenses for constructing the pool were incurred for the primary purpose of, and related directly to, his medical care. Therefore, P is not entitled to deduct any portion of such expenses under sec. 213, I.R.C. 1954, relating to medical expenses.
1Opinion of the Court
Simpson, Judge:
The Commissioner determined a deficiency of $4,025.01 in the petitioners’ Federal income tax for 1972. The parties have settled certain issues, and the only issue remaining for decision is whether the petitioner is entitled to a medical expense deduction under section 213,1.R.C. 1954,1 for a portion of the amount he expended for the construction of a swimming pool at his home.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts have been stipulated, and those facts are so found.
The petitioners, C. William Haines and Sara B. Haines, are husband and wife who maintained their legal residence in…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Havey v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1949
- W. Lawrence Oliver and Hazel P. Oliver v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1966
- Hayne v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1954
- Seymour v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
- Collins H. Ferris and Bonnie Bach Ferris v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1978
3Cited by15 opinions
- Baker v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2004
- Worden v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1981
- Baker v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2004
- Cherry v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1983
- Delbert L. and Margaret J. Baker v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2004
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.