Garcia v. Comm'r

2008 T.C. Summary Opinion 134, 2008 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 136
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedOctober 28, 2008
DocketNo. 26361-06S
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2008 T.C. Summary Opinion 134 (Garcia v. Comm'r) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Garcia v. Comm'r, 2008 T.C. Summary Opinion 134, 2008 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 136 (tax 2008).

Opinion

JOSE A. AND SYLVIA M. GARCIA, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Garcia v. Comm'r
No. 26361-06S
United States Tax Court
T.C. Summary Opinion 2008-134; 2008 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 136;
October 28, 2008, Filed

PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b), THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.

*136
Jose A. and Sylvia M. Garcia, Pro se.
Vicki L. Miller, for respondent.
Vasquez, Juan F.

JUAN F. VASQUEZ

VASQUEZ, Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of section 7463 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect when the petition was filed. 1 Pursuant to section 7463(b), the decision to be entered is not reviewable by any other court, and this opinion shall not be treated as precedent for any other case.

Respondent determined a deficiency of $ 2,815 in petitioners' 2003 Federal income tax. The issue for decision is whether petitioners' unreimbursed employee business expenses claimed on Schedule A, Itemized Deductions, of their 2003 return are deductible pursuant to section 162.

Background

Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found. The stipulation of facts and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. At the time they filed the petition, petitioners resided in New Mexico.

During 2003 Jose A. Garcia (petitioner) worked for two different employers *137 in the construction industry. Petitioner worked for Wolf Corp. (Wolf) from January 1 through May 5, 2003. Wolf had a reimbursement policy in effect for employee business expenses and miles driven in the course of employment. Wolf would have reimbursed petitioner for the mileage incurred in the course of his employment during 2003 if he had submitted a request for reimbursement; petitioner did not submit a request.

From June 26 through December 29, 2003, petitioner worked for Lockwood Construction Co. (Lockwood). Lockwood did not have an employee expense reimbursement policy in effect during the time of petitioner's employment.

Petitioner owned a 1988 Ford Ranger truck and drove it for business purposes in 2003.

Petitioners filed a joint return in 2003, claiming deductions of $ 24,986.32 for unreimbursed employee expenses of vehicle expenses, parking, and overnight travel. Petitioner claimed to have driven 65,212 miles for work during 2003. In applying the standard mileage rate of $ 0.36 to this figure, petitioner calculated a vehicle expense deduction of $ 23,476.32. Petitioner also claimed $ 160 in parking fees and $ 1,350 in overnight travel expenses during 2003.

Petitioner submitted *138 copies of the first and last pages of a mileage log to document the miles driven. Petitioner had lost the actual mileage log and did not attempt to reconstruct the mileage log. Petitioner made entries in the mileage log at the end of every day. The first page logged trips from January 6 to February 6 and listed a starting odometer reading of 230,156. The last page logged trips from the last 3 weeks in November through the end of the year and listed an ending odometer reading of 295,368. The first page of the mileage log reports 4,635 miles driven and the last page of the mileage log reports 6,553 miles driven. The log provides the day of the week, the date, the destination(s), the mileage driven during the day, and the starting and ending mileage for 2003.

Petitioner was not able to produce any oil change receipts or similar receipts which would have listed the mileage.

Discussion

Petitioners have neither claimed nor shown that they satisfied the requirements of section 7491(a) to shift the burden of proof to respondent with regard to any factual issue. Accordingly, petitioners bear the burden of proof. See Rule 142(a). Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and the taxpayer has *139 the burden of showing that he is entitled to any deduction claimed. Rule 142(a); New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934).

Section 162(a) allows a taxpayer to deduct all ordinary and necessary expenses paid or incurred during the taxable year in carrying on a trade or business, including a trade or business as an employee. Lucas v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 1, 6 (1982). An employee cannot deduct trade or business expenses to the extent that the employee is entitled to reimbursement from his or her employer for expenditures related to his or her status as an employee. Id. at 7;

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering
292 U.S. 435 (Supreme Court, 1934)
Stolk v. Commissioner
40 T.C. 345 (U.S. Tax Court, 1963)
Sanford v. Commissioner
50 T.C. 823 (U.S. Tax Court, 1968)
Kennelly v. Commissioner
56 T.C. 936 (U.S. Tax Court, 1971)
Lucas v. Commissioner
79 T.C. No. 1 (U.S. Tax Court, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2008 T.C. Summary Opinion 134, 2008 Tax Ct. Summary LEXIS 136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garcia-v-commr-tax-2008.