1993 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 48 | Tax Ct. | 1993
1993 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 48">*48 Decision will be entered under Rule 155.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
GOLBERG,
Respondent determined a deficiency in Thomas A. Meersman's Federal income tax for tax year 1988 in the amount of $ 5,147, an addition to tax under
Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found. The stipulation of facts and attached exhibits are incorporated by this reference. Petitioner resided in Tigard, Oregon, when he filed his petition.
After concessions by respondent, 1 the issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner is entitled to claim a deduction for a loss sustained on the sale of his personal residence in 1988; (2) whether petitioner is entitled to claim a deduction as an ordinary and necessary business expense for amounts paid as a1993 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 48">*49 penalty under
Thomas A. Meersman (petitioner) incorporated Paperworks, Inc. (Paperworks), a paper distribution company whose place of business was Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1980. Paperworks encountered financial difficulties, and1993 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 48">*50 Paul Reichert (Reichert), another investor, was brought into the business in 1982 under an agreement that if the losses continued, Reichert would take control of Paperworks. On March 8, 1983, petitioner was advised that Reichert was going to assume control, and on March 29, 1983, petitioner resigned as president of Paperworks and relinquished his stock. Paperworks filed a petition in bankruptcy in 1983.
Paperworks had collected but not paid over some of its employment taxes withheld from employee wages. Petitioner was assessed a penalty under
In 1988, petitioner paid $ 11,608.86, in satisfaction of his 100-percent penalty. This sum consisted of $ 7,493.51, an overpayment of petitioner's 1987 Federal income tax, which was applied1993 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 48">*51 to satisfy his 100-percent penalty liability for the quarter ending June 30, 1983, and $ 4,115.35 in the form of a certified check paid to petitioner's attorney, Thomas McNamara (McNamara), on June 14, 1988. McNamara agreed to hold the check until a certificate of discharge under section 6325(b)(2)(B) was issued by respondent to petitioner on the ground that the interest of the United States in the property had no value. McNamara was then to transfer the $ 4,115.35 to respondent for application against petitioner's liability for the 100-percent penalty. The amount of $ 4,115.35 was credited against petitioner's 100-percent penalty liability for the quarter ending June 30, 1983, on April 27, 1989.
Petitioner personally guaranteed Paperworks' loans, and in 1988 he sold his real estate, including his personal residence in Georgia, to make good on the loan guarantees. Petitioner sustained a loss of $ 23,760 on the sale of this property. He reported this loss on Schedule D, Capital Gains and Losses, of his 1988 income tax return.
Respondent determined that petitioner was not entitled to claim a deduction for a capital loss on the sale of his personal residence in Savannah, Georgia. 1993 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 48">*52 Petitioner presented no argument as to the deductibility of this loss.
Petitioner deducted as "taxes" on Schedule C the amount of $ 11,608.86 which he had paid to satisfy the 100-percent penalty. Respondent determined that this deduction is prohibited by
(f) FINES AND PENALTIES. -- No deduction shall be allowed under subsection (a) for any fine or similar penalty paid to a government for the violation of any law.
Petitioner deducted, as ordinary and necessary business expenses, the total amount of $ 987.88, consisting of travel expenses and legal fees in connection with the removal of Federal tax liens from his property. Respondent determined that these amounts are not deductible because petitioner was not carrying on any trade or business with respect to Paperworks in 1988.
The expenses are deductible, however, under
We hold that petitioner's expenses in connection with the collection of his 100-percent penalty liability are deductible.
Respondent determined that petitioner is liable for the additions to tax under
We find under the circumstances of this case that petitioner was negligent. The law*56 is clear that no deduction is allowable for the payment of a
Footnotes
1. Respondent conceded at trial the issues of petitioner's entitlement to claim a deduction for a capital loss sustained on the sale of his former residence in Columbus, Ohio, which had been converted to a rental property. This sale gave rise to a capital loss carryforward in the amount of $ 660, which petitioner claimed as a deduction. In the stipulation of facts, respondent conceded that petitioner was not liable for the addition to tax under sec. 6661 for substantial understatement because he had made an adequate factual disclosure on his return.↩