Orvis v. C.I.R., 84-7873
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Before REINHARDT, BEEZER, and HALL; CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL |
| Citation | 788 F.2d 1406 |
| Parties | -1356, 86-1 USTC P 9386 Thomas V. ORVIS and Bobye G. Orvis, Petitioners-Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 84-7873,84-7873 |
| Decision Date | 01 May 1986 |
Page 1406
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.
Ninth Circuit.
Decided May 1, 1986.
Thomas V. Orvis, Bobye G. Orvis, pro se.
Glenn L. Archer, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., I.R.S., Teresa McCaughlin, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for respondent-appellee.
Petition to Review a Decision of the United States Tax Court.
Before REINHARDT, BEEZER, and HALL, Circuit Judges.
CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL, Circuit Judge:
This case raises two questions under the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (the "Code") as in effect in 1978: 1 (1) whether a taxpayer's contribution to an individual retirement account is deductible when the taxpayer is a participant in another qualified retirement plan for a portion of the tax year, and (2) whether an item is deductible as a necessary expense of a taxpayer's trade or business when the taxpayer could have sought reimbursement from his employer but failed to do so. The Tax Court held that neither item was deductible. We have jurisdiction, 26 U.S.C. Sec. 7482(a), and we affirm.
The County of Fresno, California, employed Bobye G. Orvis during the first six months of 1978. As a condition of Mrs. Orvis' employment, the County required her to participate in a defined benefit retirement plan. The plan provided for employer and employee contributions in an amount sufficient to satisfy the total projected future liability for employee retirements. Upon termination of employment with the County after less than five years of service, an employee receives a refund of his contributions plus accrued interest (but does not receive any portion of the employer contributions).
Mrs. Orvis terminated her employment with the County in June, 1978, and received a refund of her contributions to the plan plus interest. Because she had been employed by the County for less than five
Page 1407
years, Mrs. Orvis forfeited her interest in the County's contribution and was no longer eligible for benefits. In September, 1978, Mrs. Orvis contributed $1,500 to an individual retirement account ("IRA") and claimed a deduction for this amount on her and her husband's 1978 joint tax return. The Commissioner determined that the IRA contribution was not deductible, and the Tax Court affirmed. Mrs. Orvis appealed.We review the Tax Court's interpretation of the Internal Revenue Code de novo. See Dumdeang v. Commissioner, 739 F.2d 452, 453 (9th Cir.1984). Mrs. Orvis relies generally on I.R.C. Sec. 219(a)(1) 2 and specifically on the Seventh Circuit's decision in Foulkes v. Commissioner, 638 F.2d 1105 (7th Cir.1981) to support her position that the IRA contribution is deductible. In Foulkes, the Seventh Circuit held that section 219(a)(1) entitled the taxpayer to a deduction even though the taxpayer had been a member of a qualified retirement plan for a portion of the tax year. In so holding, the court determined that section 219(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Code did not preclude deduction of the IRA contribution. That section provided in part:
(b) Limitations and Restrictions
(2) Covered by certain other plans
No deduction is allowed under subsection (a) for an individual for the taxable year if for any part of such year--
(A) he was an active participant in--(i) a [qualified pension, profit-sharing, or stock bonus] plan described in section 401(a) which includes a trust exempt from tax under section 501(a) ....
The court in Foulkes found the term "active participant" to be ambiguous and then examined...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scar v. C.I.R., 85-7212
...decide whether the Tax Court had jurisdiction we review de novo the Tax Court's interpretation of section 6212(a). Orvis v. Commissioner, 788 F.2d 1406, 1407 (9th Cir.1986); Ebben v. Commissioner, 783 F.2d 906, 909 (9th Section 6212(a) states in part: "If the Secretary determines that there......
-
Rogers v. Comm'r, T.C. Memo. 2018-53
...could convert a partnership expense into a deduction for himself by deciding not to seek reimbursement. See Orvis v. Commissioner, 788 F.2d 1406, 1408 (9th Cir. 1986) (disallowing an employee's deduction for a reimbursable employee expense), aff'g T.C. Memo. 1984-533. Petitioners further ar......
-
Schaeffer v. Commissioner, Docket No. 4280-91.
...is a clear rule and applies even when an employee is unaware that expenses are reimbursable. Orvis v. Commissioner [86-1 USTC ¶ 9386], 788 F.2d 1406 (9th Cir. 1986), affg. [Dec. 41,537(M)] T.C. Memo. 1984-533. Therefore, we conclude that petitioner is not entitled to a deduction for the exp......
-
U.S. v. Nordbrock, 93-15533
...999 v. C.I.T. Corp., 776 F.2d 866, 871 (9th Cir.1985), as we do interpretations of the Internal Revenue Code. Orvis v. Commissioner, 788 F.2d 1406, 1407 (9th We hold that 26 U.S.C. Sec. 6695(d), the statute providing for various tax return-related penalties, on its face places the burden on......
-
Scar v. C.I.R., 85-7212
...decide whether the Tax Court had jurisdiction we review de novo the Tax Court's interpretation of section 6212(a). Orvis v. Commissioner, 788 F.2d 1406, 1407 (9th Cir.1986); Ebben v. Commissioner, 783 F.2d 906, 909 (9th Section 6212(a) states in part: "If the Secretary determines that there......
-
Rogers v. Comm'r, T.C. Memo. 2018-53
...could convert a partnership expense into a deduction for himself by deciding not to seek reimbursement. See Orvis v. Commissioner, 788 F.2d 1406, 1408 (9th Cir. 1986) (disallowing an employee's deduction for a reimbursable employee expense), aff'g T.C. Memo. 1984-533. Petitioners further ar......
-
Schaeffer v. Commissioner, Docket No. 4280-91.
...is a clear rule and applies even when an employee is unaware that expenses are reimbursable. Orvis v. Commissioner [86-1 USTC ¶ 9386], 788 F.2d 1406 (9th Cir. 1986), affg. [Dec. 41,537(M)] T.C. Memo. 1984-533. Therefore, we conclude that petitioner is not entitled to a deduction for the exp......
-
U.S. v. Nordbrock, 93-15533
...999 v. C.I.T. Corp., 776 F.2d 866, 871 (9th Cir.1985), as we do interpretations of the Internal Revenue Code. Orvis v. Commissioner, 788 F.2d 1406, 1407 (9th We hold that 26 U.S.C. Sec. 6695(d), the statute providing for various tax return-related penalties, on its face places the burden on......
-
Tax Court In Brief | Pedersen v. Commissioner | Schedule A Itemized Miscellaneous Business Deductions By Employee
...receive reimbursement, and that he or she did not have the right to obtain reimbursement from the employer. See Orvis v. Commissioner, 788 F.2d 1406, 1408 (9th Cir. aff'gC. Memo. 1984-533; Fountain v. Commissioner, 59 T.C. 696, 708 (1973). The taxpayer can prove that he was not entitled to ......
-
Recent developments in individual taxation.
...(3.) P.L. 115-97. (4.) Isaacson. T.C. Memo. 2020-17. (5.) CoBins, T.C. Memo. 2020-50. (6.) Near. T.C. Memo. 2020-10. (7.) Orvis, 788 F.2d 1406. 1408 (9th Or. (8.) Conard. 154 T.C. No. 6 (2020). (9.) IRS Letter Ruling 201950004. (10.) Hamilton. No. 19-9000 (10th Cir. 4/7/20). (11.) Rev. Proc......
-
Proving employee business expense deductions.
...employee does not seek reimbursement for a business expense incurred on behalf of his or her employer. The Ninth Circuit held in Orvis, 788 F.2d 1406 (9th Cir. 1986), that a taxpayer's lack of knowledge that his employer had a policy of reimbursing such expenses was not relevant to whether ......