Opinion ID: 502459
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: dental materials

Text: 36 The taxpayers argue that the Tax Court improperly disallowed $10,138 in expenses for dentures, novocaine, drill bits, needles and other dental supplies and equipment. The only citation in support of these deductions is a reference to Dr. Pfluger's testimony. The claimed deductions have no documentary support. 37 Further, petitioners make the argument that we should allow the deductions based solely on the Pflugers' assertion that materials were necessary for the dental practice. [I]t is certaintly [sic] illogical to assume that one can operate a dental practice ... and not have any expenditures for ... materials. Petitioners' Brief at 15-16. That assertion misses the point. The Pflugers had the burden of producing persuasive evidence to support their claimed deductions. Undoubtedly Dr. Pfluger spent money on materials, but he refused to produce the evidence to prove those expenditures. We cannot simply guess as to the amount he could have deducted. He chose his uncooperative path; the fact that he will pay more tax than if he had been more forthright should not cause us to bend the law in his favor.