Fausner v. Commissioner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting a situation in which an allocation of costs may be made between personal and business expenses
• \ We cannot read section 262 of the Internal Revenue Code as excluding such expenses from 'personal' expenses\
• \ We cannot read section 262 of the Internal Revenue Code as excluding such expense from 'personal' expenses\
• expenses of driving to work treated as personal expenses where taxpayer would have driven to work anyway even if he had not transported job-related tools and materials
• which involved the present taxpayer who then lived in New York
• “all taxpayers shall 4 A provision like this could explain why Mr. Evans was required to sign the book in Wenatchee to be referred for work in Quincy. DECISION TC-MD 180391G 7 of 15 bear the expense of commuting to and from work without receiving a deduction for that expense”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).