Discussion:Police Officers - Meals
From TaxAlmanac
Discussion Forum Index --> Advanced Tax Questions --> Police Officers - Meals
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> Police Officers - Meals
| February 7, 2008 | |
| Have several police officer clients. For years I have been taking their roadside meals as unreimbured business expense per Code Section 162. Genesis is the well known "Christie" Minnesota State Trooper case. Police Officers are here in NJ and I am told this a recurring topic at their state PBA and FOP meetings. Specifically, is or is it not allowed. No has ever been audited for this so I can't yet be sure if this deduction will be allowed or not.
I don't go overboard with this and take only $8 per day at 50% for the actual number of work days the officers are on the road, so actual Sch A deduction is only about $800. Don't want a problem for myself or the clients but I'm losing police clients by not increasing the per diem amount. Actual out of pocket is closer to $28 per day for two meals because of 10 hour shifts. | |
| 7 February 2008 | |
| If that is the case that is typically posted on police bulletin boards don't go by that. I know many of the officer that are now my clients were going to a CPA for years because he would deduct all of their meals until I actually gave them a copy of the case. As I recall the case was over about $80 and was a very unique set of circumstances. He had to get out of the car to eat by contract. He had to be in contact to take calls while in the restaurants. The state wanted the troopers to mingle among the public. The trooper only deducted the meals that he had to leave to answer a call. He did win that case. One winning case does not make law. | |
| 8 February 2008 | |
| IRS follows Christie in the Eighth Circuit only. The Eighth Circuit includes Ark., Iowa, Minn., Mo. Neb., N.D., S.D. Don't see New Jersey listed there. | |
RoyDaleOne (talk|edits) said: | 8 February 2008 |
| The Supreme Court will have to rule on this one day if the lower courts are in conflict. | |
| 8 February 2008 | |
| Taxtips writes: IRS follows Christie(sic)in the Eighth Circuit only.
Actually, in AOD 1989-018, the Service announced it would not acquiesce to the Christey decision. Most police officers in the 8th circuit do NOT have work conditions similar to the fact pattern regarding MN State troopers. From the AOD: Accordingly, the Service views the Christey decision as being incorrect. The inherently personal nature of such meal expenses bars their deduction pursuant to section 262, and this nondeductibility cannot be overriden by the general provisions of section 162(a), notwithstanding a showing of business-related restrictions on such meals. Thus, the Service will not follow the Christey decision other than with respect to SUBSTANIALLY SIMILAR police midshift restaurant meal expenses within the jurisdiction of the Eighth Circuit. | |
| 8 February 2008 | |
| Life would be a whole lot easier for all of us (and for taxpayers) if, when these issues arise, Congress would decide what they really mean and amend the law so it is clear and uniform for everyone. Look at all the time and effort wasted on the telephone tax issue - Congress could have clarified the matter. | |
| February 10, 2008 | |
| Thank you, all for replying to my question. Consensus obviously precludes this deduction but each township here in NJ has different guidelines which further clouds the situation. I don't want to ask IRS for definitive IRS Letter Ruling to substantiate (and document for client reference) my reasons for not taking this deduction anymore but I am aware that other local preparers have, and will continue to, take this as an itemized deduction until such time someone is audited and formally disallowed the $8 - $12 per day. | |
| 10 February 2008 | |
| Fred,
This one has been beaten to death. Check out the following: Discussion:Meal deductions for police officers Riley2 is acknowledged by everyone here as THE MAN. He speaks, we listen. Years ago, I addressed this issue in my area with a high-ranking officer friend. I told him I found it ironic that those who were sworn to uphold the law were busy trying to stretch it. He agreed and posted Christey and told his officers it was a not a deduction. It turns out several of the officers were being audited because they were all going to the same preparer and getting very generous refunds based on some very shady deductions that police officers were "entitled" to get. Now, mind you, there are legitimate ones. But this person really stretched the truth (driving to the grocery store became deductible because they may have to arrest someone). Basically, Christey is narrowly defined and not recognized outside the Eighth Circuit. It's that simple. Tom | |
Cpabakem99 (talk|edits) said: | 10 February 2008 |
| Cops on the beat gotta eat, right? Every year, enrolled agent Cindy Hockenberry of the National Association of Tax Professionals gets asked the same question: Policemen (and firemen) may deduct a per diem for meals eaten while they're on duty, right?
Every year she gives the same answer: No. "It's just a bad rumor that keeps going around. And it won't go away," she said. Milt Baker CPA | |
| February 11, 2008 | |
| Done. No more more "meals on wheels" as the local here refer to them. Actually, I'm very relieved because I never felt comfortable with this deduction. Thanks again. | |
| 11 February 2008 | |
| This is not really tax related, but I think this is interesting. I am married to a trooper and because it is not mandated by our state to eat at a restaurant while on duty, he NEVER does. This is because in almost every restaurant in our town, he knows at least 1 person he has either arrested or someone else in his department has arrested. He does not trust what they will do to his food. About 5 years ago, he went to a state police conference and he wasn't hungry so he didn't eat. Everyone who ate got food poisoning. I don't think it was a coincidence.
As far as the fact that this is a bad rumor that keeps going around, I can see why. Police officers are a very close knit group. I do a lot of their tax returns and every time I get a new one in, they tell me about a "special" deduction for police officers. Sometimes my husband even asks me why we aren't doing something and why I missed the deduction (like why aren't we deducting our home telephone; I have to have one to respond to emergencies; So and so deducts this). I tell him to go to H&R Block and file separately :) | |
| 18 July 2008 | |
| Here's the Minnesota State Trooper "Christey" case:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/841/841.F2d.809.86-5433.html There are great points in the case with regard to deducting meals, i.e. officers maintain on duty status while taking their meal break and can always be interrupted by communications for calls or by the general public at any time during their meals because of their high visibility. Of course it's always subject to interpretation by the taxpayer under Sect. 162(a), and the IRS under Sect. 262 Tres. Regs. | |
