Helpful Hints
  • (1) You can search the entire content of Dean’s by phrase or by individual words. Just type your keywords into the search box and then pull down the search icon on the right and choose the option you need: search by word or by phrase or reset the content.
  • (2) Double click on a word in the content of a definition, and if the word is listed as a keyword in Dean’s, it will look that word up.
  • (3) You can use the search function to help jump the scrolling function. Simply type the first 2-3 letters into the search box then hit enter on your keyboard and the scroll will go to those Keywords that begin with those letters and allow you to scroll from there.

 The Supreme Court in Peurifoy v. Commissioner, 358 U.S. 59, 79 S. Ct. 104, 3 L. Ed. 2d 30 (1958) (per curiam) stated that the Tax Court had 'engrafted an exception' onto the requirement that travel expenses be dictated by business exigencies, allowing 'a deduction for expenditures ... when the taxpayer's employment is 'temporary' as contrasted with 'indefinite' or 'indeterminate.' ' 358 U.S. at 59, 79 S. Ct. at 104. Because the Commissioner did not challenge this exception, the Court did not rule on its validity. It instead upheld the circuit court's reversal of the Tax Court and disallowance of the deduction on the basis of the adequacy of the appellate court's review. The Supreme Court agreed that the Tax Court's finding as to the temporary nature of taxpayer's employment was clearly erroneous. Id. at 60-61, 79 S. Ct. at 105. 

Despite its inauspicious beginning, the exception has come to be generally accepted. Some uncertainty lingers, however, over whether the exception properly applies to the 'business exigencies' or the 'away from home' requirement. Compare Brandl, supra, 513 F.2d at 699 and Blatnick v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 1344, 1348 (1971) with Frederick, supra, ...

Register or login to access full content