The perennial Section 274 substantiation jumpballs draw extensive attention, as preparers need to know “how much is enough?”

I’m a little late getting to this today, as I spent the morning with the Continuing Educators grabbing some hours.

Well, Judge Marvel has some good advice in Ricky Ray Ressen and Rosalind Ressen, 2015 T. C. Sum. Op. 32, filed 4/21/15.

It’s Ricky Ray’s story. He drove his Chevy to the levee (in fact he had two Chevys), but, unlike the hero of Don McLean’s 1971 classic, the levee wasn’t dry for Ricky Ray.

Here’s why. “Mr. Ressen maintained a calendar and a logbook to record his business activities and the business use of the 2007 and 2008 Chevys. Upon returning home at the end of each week he recorded the miles he drove during the previous week in the calendar. Additionally, as required by [his employer] he recorded in general terms his daily business activities and weekly travel in the logbook. He also recorded the beginning and ending mileage for the 2007 and 2008 Chevys in the logbook.” 2015 T. C. Sum. Op. 32, at p. 4.

Ricky Ray was an itinerant construction supervisor, who roamed the Midwest for his employer, who didn’t reimburse vehicle expenses.

Maybe Ricky Ray has a wee bit of a temper, because after “communication broke down between petitioners and respondent’s revenue agent”, the RA disallowed all of Ricky Ray’s vehicle expenses. 2015 T. C. Sum. Op. 32, at p. 5.

Even though Ricky Ray didn’t put every piece of paper he had into evidence, he put in enough to satisfy Judge Marvel.

“With respect to the portion of the disallowed deduction attributable to their claimed use of the 2007 and 2008 Chevys, petitioners introduced copies of the calendar in which Mr. Ressen contemporaneously recorded his weekly mileage as an employee…as well as some information regarding where he was working at various times. Petitioners also introduced copies of the pages in the logbook on which he contemporaneously recorded the beginning and ending miles for the 2007 and 2008 Chevys. Considering the facts and circumstances of Mr. Ressen’s employment arrangement…and his business use of the 2007 and 2008 Chevys we conclude that the calendar is a credible, adequate record of the amount of the business use of the property, the dates of such use, and the business purpose of such use, and the logbook pages are an adequate record of the total use of the property.

“Additionally, even if the calendar is for some reason not an adequate record of the amounts or dates of the business use of the 2007 and 2008 Chevys, Mr. Ressen credibly and with specificity testified as to the business use of the property and the dates of such use. Petitioners corroborated this testimony with the pages from the logbook.” 2015 T. C. Sum. Op. 32, at p. 11. (Citations omitted).

Even part of the logbook is enough.

“Although petitioners did not introduce the entire logbook into evidence, we conclude that the pages of the logbook that they did introduce are representative of contemporaneous, adequate records that Mr. Ressen maintained for the entire year and that they sufficiently corroborate his testimony with respect to the amounts and dates of the business use of the 2007 and 2008 Chevys for the entire year. We therefore conclude that petitioners satisfied the substantiation requirements of section 274(d) with respect to their claimed use of the 2007 and 2008 Chevys.” 2015 T. C. Sum. Op. 32, at p. 12.

Takeaway–A representative sample of adequate evidence may well carry the day–whether or not in a Chevy.