TaxProf Blog

Editor: Paul L. Caron
Pepperdine University School of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Fleischer 1, IRS 0

Posted by Victor Fleischer

TaxCtdecisionPrivate equity professionals will no doubt be thrilled to hear that I was recently audited.  At issue: a few thousand dollars in traveling expenses "while away from home in pursuit of a trade or business" (section 162) when I visited Georgetown for a semester in the Fall of 2005.  So while the private equity titans spent last summer successfully defending their million dollar tax breaks, I was busy holding on to my meager deduction (a deduction already made smaller by the AMT!).  After some frustrating interactions with a local office, I filed a petition with the tax court, and a settlement followed promptly and without fuss.

Nothing would make me happier than retiring as a tax litigator with a perfect 1-0 record.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2008/11/fleischer-1-irs-0.html

Celebrity Tax Lore | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4eab53ef0105361a7c8d970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Fleischer 1, IRS 0:

Comments

Now that you've tantalized us with your win, would you be willing to reveal a bit more about the substance of the dispute? Did the local office contend that your tax home had become D.C.? How could they deny you a deduction for travel expenses when you were clearly visiting away from home???

Posted by: Jason Kilborn | Nov 26, 2008 7:31:35 AM

It is crazy that you had to petition the Tax Court. From the facts you provide, this should easily have been no changed by Office Audit.
Congratulations on achieving justice. But imagine how many taxpayers without your skill set just cave in when the deductions are clearly allowable under IRC 162.
Happy Thanksgiving to you.

Best,

Abe Carnow

Posted by: Abe Carnow | Nov 26, 2008 8:18:00 AM

"But imagine how many taxpayers without your skill set just cave in when the deductions are clearly allowable under IRC 162."

Especially if the penalty and taxes amount to less than the legal fees would.

Posted by: Angela | Dec 1, 2008 12:56:07 PM