Attorney-at-Law

AMBITION AND FUTILITY

In Uncategorized on 06/21/2023 at 19:47

CSTJ Lewis (“His Spelling Casts a Spell”) Carluzzo’s docket runs the gamut.

First up, Ariana K. Uchizono, T. C. Sum. Op. 2023-21, filed 6/21/23. Ariana is ambitious and multilingual, so upon graduating college she goes to work for a translating service. CSTJ Lew goes over Ariana’s job description closely. Ariana wants something more, so she goes for a MBA at UCLA, and deducts the costs as an unreimbursed employee business expense, for a year when that was still OK. The translating outfit would only reimburse for language courses, and Ariana didn’t take any.

CSTJ Lew goes over Ariana’s coursework and transcript, and the job description for the internship Ariana got at a major toy company, from which she got a permanent job, and decides the MBA fitted Ariana for a different job. Reg Section 1.162-5(a) denies deductions for training for a different job.

“In this case, the courses petitioner took as part of her M.B.A. program qualified her to perform tasks that were significantly different from the tasks she had performed in her employment with [translators]. A number of those courses related to research and data analysis. No doubt some of the courses might have refined and improved the skills necessary for petitioner’s employment with [translators], insofar as a foundation in accounting, finance, and management could be helpful to anyone involved in the operation of a business. However, petitioner’s M.B.A. studies were more specifically oriented towards the job for which she eventually left [translators].” T. C;. Sum. Op. 2023-21, at p. 5. (Name omitted).

Unhappily, Ariana didn’t help her case on the stand. I feel for her trusty attorney; having a candid, truthful client can be a burden.

“Petitioner acknowledges that she would not have felt comfortable making certain decisions required in her job with [toy co.] had it not been for her M.B.A. courses. Specifically, petitioner’s data and analysis coursework prepared her to perform her essential role with [toy co.], that is, orchestrating qualitative or quantitative online surveys and analyzing the resultant data. Simply put, without the M.B.A. degree petitioner would not have been otherwise qualified for her position with [toy co.].” T. C. Sum. Op. 2023-21, at p. 5. (Name omitted).

Next, futility. Thu L. Tran, Docket No. 16576-22SL, filed 6/21/23, never petitioned the SNOD but did petition the NOD. Thu wants to fight about liability, but that’s a nonstarter. So CSTJ is left with nothing to do.

But being CSTJ Lew, he won’t leave Thu comfortless, even though perforce he must toss him.

“In closing, we think it appropriate to note that the resolution of this matter says nothing about the merits of petitioner’s claim that the underlying liability is overstated. To that end, and independent of this proceeding, petitioner is free to pursue whatever remedies might be available to him in an attempt to give effect to his claim regarding the underlying liability. He is also free to request other administratively available collection alternatives.” Transcript, at p. 6.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.