## Facts

- Hoke F. Henderson, Jr., and Karen L. Henderson filed a joint federal income tax return for the 1977 tax year.
- Karen L. Henderson worked for the State of South Carolina as an assistant attorney general.
- The State provided Henderson with an office that was already furnished with work-related items, including a desk, desk chair, work table, telephone, dictaphone, bookcase, filing cabinet, law books, and chairs for visitors.
- Henderson’s duties included consulting with public officials, attorneys, and others from the private sector, and some of those meetings occurred in her office.
- During 1977, Henderson bought a framed print for $35 and a live plant for $35 for the purpose of decorating her office.
- In 1977, Henderson also paid $180 to rent a parking space located across the street from her office.
- Henderson occasionally used her personal automobile for work when a State pool vehicle was unavailable, but she did not establish how frequently this occurred or how the rented parking space related to business travel rather than commuting.
- The Hendersons claimed deductions as employee business expenses for the framed print, the plant, and the parking fees.
- The Commissioner of Internal Revenue disallowed the deductions and determined a deficiency (reported as $124), and the Hendersons petitioned the United States Tax Court for redetermination.

## Issues

1. Whether an employee may deduct, under I.R.C. § 162(a), amounts paid for a framed print and a live plant used to decorate an employer-provided and fully furnished office.
2. Whether an employee may deduct, under I.R.C. § 162(a), amounts paid to rent a parking space near the employee’s regular workplace where the employee only occasionally used a personal vehicle for work and did not show a business allocation distinct from commuting.

## Decision

- The Tax Court sustained the Commissioner’s determination and denied the requested deductions.
- The court held that the framed print and plant were personal in nature and were not shown to be ordinary and necessary employee business expenses.
- The court held that the parking fees were personal commuting-related costs, and the record did not support treating any portion as a deductible business expense.
- As a result, the claimed deductions for the décor items and the parking expense were disallowed in full.

## Legal Principles

- A deduction is allowed under I.R.C. § 162(a) only for expenses that are ordinary and necessary and paid or incurred in carrying on a trade or business, including an employee’s trade or business of being an employee.
- Personal, living, or family expenses are not deductible under I.R.C. § 262, even if they are incurred at or near the workplace.
- Voluntary purchases that primarily reflect personal taste or personal comfort—such as decorative items for an office already furnished by the employer—are generally personal expenses unless the taxpayer shows they were required for the job or were a common and accepted business practice tied to the work performed.
- Costs of commuting between home and a regular place of work are personal and nondeductible; parking near the regular workplace is ordinarily treated the same way.
- The taxpayer bears the burden of proving entitlement to deductions, including showing a business purpose and, where relevant, a reasonable method to allocate any mixed personal and business expense.

## Conclusion

In *Henderson v. Commissioner*, the Tax Court treated an employee’s purchases of office decorations and her paid parking near the workplace as nondeductible personal expenses because she did not show that the expenses were required, customary, or primarily connected to carrying on her work as an assistant attorney general rather than personal preference and commuting convenience.


Henderson v. Commissioner, 46 T.C.M 566 (1985)