Today the Tax Court looked at a casualty loss case. Many times when casualty loss cases make their way to Tax Court, there’s a dispute about whether or not there really was a loss. Not today.
A fire destroyed the victim’s office on the university campus where he worked as a Professor of Economics. He lost a litany of belongings, which he detailed as follows:
Books on economics $2,000
Books by “famous authors” 1,000
Books on Africa 5,000
African journals & magazines 3,000
Book manuscript 15,000
Memorabilia (awards, plaques, etc.) 3,000
Briefcases, fans, etc. 2,000
Computer printer 250
Labor/inconvenience/distress 2,000
The unlucky victim did receive $12,000 in compensation from the university’s insurance company. The IRS denied a portion of his casualty loss.
When you have a casualty loss, such as a fire, your loss for tax purposes is based on the lessor of your basis in the assets you lose, or the fair market value of the assets. As the Tax Court notes,
“Petitioner, however, has not produced any evidence as to what his bases or costs in the various items may have been. Indeed, while they may have had value to petitioner, it is clear that the memorabilia had no costs to petitioner, and petitioner would have no bases in these items. With respect to what petitioner describes as “Labor/Inconvenience/Distress”, as we understand petitioner’s testimony, the deduction was for mental upset, having to prepare new lecture notes, etc., and for teaching. These are not items of property the losses of which are deductible as casualty losses.”
One point that the Tax Court made is that the petitioner did not avail himself of any professional advice. As Albert Einstein said, “The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax.” When in any doubt, get professional tax advice. Any competent tax professional could have set this professor on the right track.