This case has nothing to do with rental deductions

The case revolves around "reasonable fees" to be reimbursed to the petitioner.  The rental appeal, on the other hand, was settled between the IRS and the petitioner out of court and outcome was not mentioned explicitly.  To summarize, IRS was not liable for the fees incurred by the petitioner as she did not "prevail" in the settlement.  IRS's earlier position of not allowing the deduction was based on evidence then on hand therefore by settling IRS did not lose.

My guess from the judge's comments is that the petitioner was able to count her travel time towards the 720 hour test and therefore she was able to make the deductions.

Please read and UNDERSTAND the case on hand before commenting, so as to not to mislead others.

Yes you guessed it I have taken a few business law classes in college.

所有跟帖： 

• thx for putting in the last piece of missing puzzle. -日月茗- ♀ (50 bytes) () 04/19/2012 postreply 22:10:42

• the settlements were specified -commonsense888- ♀ (816 bytes) () 04/19/2012 postreply 22:37:20

• Good catch I know I skipped some -LaoWong- ♀ (44 bytes) () 04/20/2012 postreply 13:45:32