                          T.C. Summary Opinion 2016-62



                         UNITED STATES TAX COURT



                 BETTY JEAN SPENCER, Petitioner v.
           COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent



      Docket No. 6024-13S.                          Filed September 26, 2016.



      Betty Jean Spencer, pro se.

      William J. Gregg, for respondent.



                              SUMMARY OPINION


      CHIECHI, Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of section

7463 of the Internal Revenue Code in effect when the petition was filed.1


      1
        Hereinafter, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code (Code)
in effect for the year at issue. All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of
                                                                        (continued...)
                                         -2-

Pursuant to section 7463(b), the decision to be entered is not reviewable by any

other court, and this opinion shall not be treated as precedent for any other case.

      Respondent determined a deficiency of $19,220 in petitioner’s Federal

income tax for her taxable year 2010.

      The issue remaining for decision for petitioner’s taxable year 2010 is

whether petitioner is entitled to a deduction under section 170(a) with respect to

certain claimed noncash charitable contributions. We hold that she is not.

                                    Background

      Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.

      At the time petitioner filed the petition in this case, she resided in Virginia.

      Petitioner and Steven M. Chapman jointly filed Form 1040, U.S. Individual

Income Tax Return, for their taxable year 2010 (2010 return).2 Petitioner attached

to that return Schedule A, Itemized Deductions, in which she claimed, inter alia, a

charitable contribution deduction with respect to total claimed noncash charitable

contributions of $57,000 (certain claimed noncash charitable contributions).




      1
       (...continued)
Practice and Procedure.
      2
        This case involves only petitioner. For convenience, we shall refer only to
petitioner when describing the contents of the 2010 return.
                                        -3-

      Petitioner included with the 2010 return four Forms 8283, Noncash

Charitable Contributions (Form 8283). Petitioner did not include with the 2010

return Section A, Donated Property of $5,000 or Less and Certain Publicly Traded

Securities, of those respective Forms 8283. Instead, petitioner included with that

return only Section B, Donated Property Over $5,000 (Except Certain Publicly

Traded Securities) (section B),3 of those respective Forms 8283.

      There are four parts in section B of each Form 8283. Petitioner set forth

certain information only in part I and in part IV of each Form 8283. In Part I,

Information on Donated Property (part I), of one of those Forms 8283, petitioner

claimed a deduction of $6,000 for “CLOTHING” that she claimed she had

purchased for $9,000 and had donated to Antioch Baptist Church when that

property was in “EXCELLENT” condition.4 In part I of another Form 8283,

petitioner claimed a deduction of $17,000 for “CLOTHING, FURNITURE, AND

SMALL APPLIANCES” that she claimed she had purchased for $20,000 and had


      3
       Instructions in section B state that a taxpayer must show in that section
“only items (or groups of similar items) for which * * * [the taxpayer] claimed a
deduction of more than $5,000 per item or group”.
      4
       Petitioner showed the name of the claimed donee of her claimed
contributions in Part IV, Donee Acknowledgement, of section B of each of the
four Forms 8283 that petitioner included with the 2010 return. No part IV of
section B of any Form 8283 contained an acknowledgement by each of those
claimed donees of petitioner’s claimed contributions.
                                        -4-

donated to Goodwill of Greater Washington (Goodwill) when that property was in

“EXCELLENT” condition.5 In part I of a third Form 8283, petitioner claimed a

deduction of $18,000 for “LARGE FURNITURE” that she claimed she had

purchased for $20,000 and had donated to AMVETS National Service Foundation

when that property was in “EXCELLENT” condition. In part I of the fourth Form

8283, petitioner claimed a deduction of $16,000 for “CLOTHING AND SMALL

APPLIANCES” that she claimed she had purchased for $20,000 and had donated

to National Children’s Center when that property was in “EXCELLENT”

condition.6

      Respondent issued a notice of deficiency to petitioner for her taxable year

2010 (notice). In that notice, respondent determined, inter alia, to disallow

petitioner’s claimed deduction under section 170(a) with respect to certain claimed

noncash charitable contributions.




      5
       Petitioner did not follow the instructions set forth in section B when she
included together in that section in one of those forms “CLOTHING,
FURNITURE, AND SMALL APPLIANCES”, which are not similar. See supra
note 3. As a result, it is not clear from the record whether petitioner’s claimed
value of any of those dissimilar items was greater than $5,000.
      6
          See supra note 5.
                                         -5-

                                     Discussion

      Petitioner bears the burden of establishing that the determinations in the

notice that remain at issue are erroneous. See Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering,

290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and

petitioner bears the burden of proving entitlement to any deduction claimed. See

INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992). The Code and the

regulations thereunder required petitioner to maintain records sufficient to

establish the amount of any deduction claimed. See sec. 6001; sec. 1.6001-1(a),

Income Tax Regs.

      It is petitioner’s position that she is entitled to a deduction under section

170(a) with respect to certain claimed noncash charitable contributions. In

support of her position, petitioner relies on her testimony and certain documents,

including four Forms 8283 that she included with the 2010 return, seven

“DONATION RECEIPTS” (Goodwill donation receipts) that Goodwill gave her,

and certain invoices relating to the purchase of certain furniture (furniture

invoices). (We shall refer collectively to the documents on which petitioner relies

as petitioner’s claimed substantiation documents.)

      With respect to petitioner’s testimony, we found her testimony to be in

certain material respects uncorroborated and self-serving. We shall not rely on
                                         -6-

petitioner’s testimony to establish her position that she is entitled to a deduction

under section 170(a) with respect to certain claimed noncash charitable

contributions. See, e.g., Tokarski v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 74, 77 (1986).

      With respect to petitioner’s claimed substantiation documents, although

each Form 8283 that petitioner included with the 2010 return showed that she had

purchased all of the noncash property that she claims she donated to charity, she

acknowledged during her testimony that she had inherited some of that property.

Petitioner also acknowledged during her testimony that Goodwill did not complete

the Goodwill donation receipts, which were presigned and were the only receipts

or written acknowledgments that she had for any of the noncash property that she

claims she donated to a charity during 2010. Instead, she completed the Goodwill

donation receipts after a Goodwill employee gave her each of the seven Goodwill

donation receipts that she introduced into the record at trial.7 Turning finally to

the furniture invoices, we are satisfied that those invoices showed that petitioner

purchased certain furniture described therein for the purchase prices shown

therein. However, we are not satisfied from those furniture invoices or from any


      7
       Petitioner completed each of the Goodwill donation receipts that Goodwill
gave her by showing, inter alia, her name, a description of the item(s) that she
claims she donated to Goodwill, and the date on which she claims she made each
such donation.
                                         -7-

other part of the record that during 2010 petitioner donated any or all of the

furniture described in those invoices to a charity. We shall not rely on petitioner’s

claimed substantiation documents to establish petitioner’s position that she is

entitled to a deduction under section 170(a) with respect to certain claimed

noncash charitable contributions.

      Section 170(a) allows a deduction for any charitable contribution, as defined

in section 170(c), that is made during a taxable year. A taxpayer claiming a

deduction under section 170(a) must satisfy certain statutory and regulatory

requirements. (We shall refer collectively to the statutory and regulatory

requirements as the charitable contribution deduction requirements.) See sec.

170(a), (c), (f); secs. 1.170A-1, 1.170A-13(a)-(c), Income Tax Regs. The

charitable contribution deduction requirements that a taxpayer must satisfy vary

depending on (1) whether the claimed contribution consists of money or property

other than money and (2) the value of the contribution. See sec. 170(a), (c), (f);

secs. 1.170A-1, 1.170A-13(a)-(c), Income Tax Regs. On the record before us, we

find that petitioner has failed to carry her burden of establishing that she satisfies

the applicable charitable contribution deduction requirements with respect to

certain claimed noncash charitable contributions.
                                          -8-

        On the record before us, we find that petitioner has failed to carry her

burden of establishing that she is entitled for her taxable year 2010 to a deduction

under section 170(a) with respect to certain claimed noncash charitable

contributions.

        We have considered all of the contentions and arguments of the parties that

are not discussed herein, and we find them to be without merit, irrelevant, and/or

moot.

        To reflect the foregoing and respondent’s concessions,


                                                Decision will be entered under Rule

                                         155.
