Hamdan
Hamdan v. Commissioner
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Khalil Hamdan and Lana K. Hamdan appeal pro se a decision of the United States Tax Court upholding the Commissioner of Internal Revenue’s determination of income tax deficiencies for tax year 1989, and an accuracy-related penalty under 26 U.S.C. § 6662 (a) for negligence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7482 . We review for clear error the factual findings of the Tax Court, Wolf v. Commissioner, 4 F.3d 709, 712 (9th Cir.1993), and the Tax Court’s finding that the Hamdans were negligent, Custom Chrome, Inc. v. Commissioner, 217 F.3d 1117, 1121 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.
The Hamdans have failed to establish that the “profit participation fee” was an ordinary and necessary business expense, and have failed to sufficiently document the travel and automobile deduction. We conclude that the Tax Court did not clearly err in finding that the Hamdans did not establish that the “profit participation fee” and travel and automobile expenses were ordinary and necessary business expenses deductible under 26 U.S.C. § 162 (a). See INDOPCO, Inc., v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 83 , 112 S.Ct. 1039 , 117 L.Ed.2d 226 (1992).