Evening star., 1961-04-14

ana PROFESSIONAL meetings.
Interestingly enough, the
tional Association Of Internal
Revenue Employees on behalf of
two Of its members. But the
implications apply to all Gov
eminent and postal employees
who attend their unions con-
ventions as delegates or par
ticipants, whether the conven-
tions are national, State OF
regional.
Internal Revenue has held
in the past that expenses may
be deducted for convention at
tendance if the taxpayer proves
attendance improved him in
his profession, business Or
trade. But it stressed that each
case would be judged on its
individual merit.
The result has been tn a t
many Government and postal
employees who attend tn e ir
unions conventions as dele
gates or in some other capa-
city have been loathe to de-
duct their expenses. And in
other cases, when their ex-
penses have been disallowed by
IRIS, they did not appeal. The
same held true for Government
officials who attended person.
mel conferences or professional
meetings at their own expense
The test case financed by
MARE involved two women
members whose expenses for
attending a MARE convention
had been disallowed by IRIS,
They took their case to the
United States Tax Court.
IRIS agreed that the two en-
ployeS' expenses should be al
lowed and deducted from their
gross income. The Tax Court
agreed. The stipulation came
in the case of Mrs. Willie T.
Skipper (for herself and Mrs
Thelma Crews), Docket No
86702.
Since the two women were
not even delegates to the
MARE convention, but partici-
pants in a panel discussion, the
IRIS action appears to make the
case for expenses deduction
even stronger for those Federal
employees who are official dele
gates to the conventions OF
their unions.
IRIS officials stress that the
action in this case should not
be interpreted to mean that a
complete new policy has been
adopted. But they acknowledge
that it probably "opens the
door" for a more liberal policy
and will encourage more en-
ployes to file for such deduc-
tions, with a good chance that
it will be allowed.
OF course. private industry
employees, too. appear destined
to benefit by MARES victory
in the test case.
| HINT OF COMPROMISE
AS expected. the Kennedy ad-
ministration has opposed the
bill to increase the value o1
Government employe life in
surance coverage. The bill also
tprovides that the added cover
age, about Is per cent above
the amount employees now carry
under the program. would not
be subject to a decline in value
after age IS.
However. in testimony before
a Senate Civil Service sub.
committee holding hearings or
the bill, administration wit.
nesses hinted that they nigh
be agreeable to a compromise
or alternative proposal. They
offered to work with the sub
committees staff toward 6
reasonable solution. The SUBJ
committee is headed by Senator
Jordan, Democrat of North
Carolina.
The main reason given BY
witnesses Phillip Hughes, AS
sistant Budget Bureau Director
for legislative reference, anc
Civil Service Commission Chair
man John w. Macy, jr.. ap'
peared to the cost-nearly $1l
million year. The administra.
ton also feels there is no urgent
need for increased life insur,
ance benefits and that tht
Governments present life in
surance program mparet
favorably with those in indus
try.
This was contested by Gov
ernment and postal employ'
union witnesses, who declared
that most private firms pay al
or most of the premiums TO
their employees group life insur
ance, as compared to the 662:
per cent Of the premiums pait
by Government workers TO