Site Loader

The Commissioner has ruled that a taxpayer’s “home,” for purposes of Code Sec. 162(a)(2), is considered to be located at (1) the taxpayer’s regular or principal (if more than one regular) place of business, or (2) if the taxpayer has no regular or principal place of business because of the nature of the trade or business, then at the regular place of abode in a real and substantial sense. See Rev. Rul. 60-189 and Rev. Rul. 71-247. If a taxpayer fails to come within either category, the taxpayer is considered to be an “itinerant” who has a “home” wherever the taxpayer happens to be working and thus is never “away from home” for traveling expense deduction purposes. Three objective factors used in determining whether a taxpayer has a “regular place of abode in a real and substantial sense” or whether the taxpayer is an itinerant are presented in Rev. Rul. 73-529.
The Commissioner’s insistence that a taxpayer’s “home,” for the purposes of this statute, is the principal place of business, regardless of where the family maintains its residence, has historically been the source of some judicial conflict. The Tax Court’s decisions have been consistent with this position, recognizing an exception when the taxpayer’s employment is only temporary as distinguished from permanent or indefinite. At the same time, this view was rejected by the Ninth Circuit in Wallace v. Com., 44-2 USTC ¶9437, 144 F. 2d 407, and by the Sixth Circuit in Burns v. Gray, 61-1 USTC ¶ 9294, 287 F.2d 698.

Post Author: admin