§261 — General rule for disallowance of deductions

60 cases·11 followed·3 distinguished·2 criticized·1 overruled·43 cited18% support

In computing taxable income no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part.

  • Treas. Reg. §Treas. Reg. §1.261-1 General rule for disallowance of deductions

60 Citing Cases

DIST. Mission Organic Center, Inc., Petitioner 165 T.C. No. 13 · 2025

Accordingly, section 280E, which applies for purposes of determining taxable income, see § 261, does not apply for purposes of determining income, and therefore does not apply for purposes of determining whether there is doubt as to collectibility, see Treas.

DIST. Techtron Holding, Inc., Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2023-29 · 2023

That section does not apply here, given that respondent’s examination did not even begin until three years after petitioner’s merger into Techtron.

But we disagree with the Commissioner that section 261 has the broadening effect he claims it does.

FOLLOWED Alexander Gertsburg & Inna Gertsburg, Petitioners T.C. Memo. 2025-127 · 2025

[which includes section 263]).” Coordinately, section 261 provides that “[i]n computing taxable income no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this [part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of subtitle A of the Code].” The Supreme Court has interpreted these two “priority-ordering directive[s]” to mean that “an expenditure incurr

Section 280E Section 261 provides that "no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect ofitems specified in this part." "[I]tems specified in this part" refers to part IX ofsubchapter B ofchapter 1, entitled "Items Not Deductible", and this includes section 280E, "Expenditures in Connection With the Illegal Sale of - 7 - [*7

Section 261 provides that "no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect ofitems specified in this part." "[I]tems in this part" refers to part IX ofsubchapter B ofchapter 1, entitled "Items Not Deductible", and this includes section 280E, "Expenditures in Connection With the Illegal Sale ofDrugs".

FOLLOWED Kellie McDonald, Petitioner · 2017

Section 261 provides that "no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect ofitems specified in this part." "[I]tems in this part" refers to part IX ofsubchapter B ofchapter 1, entitled "Items Not Deductible", and this includes section 280E, "Expenditures in Connection With the Illegal Sale ofDrugs".

Section 261 provides that "no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part ." The phrase "this part" refers to part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1, entitled "Items Not Deductible" .

FOLLOWED Edward C. & Virginia M. Blasius, Petitioner 116 T.C. No. 27 · 2001

Section 261 provides that “no deduction - 21 - shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part”; i.e., part IX (Items Not Deductible).

l method taxpayers such as petitioner may generally deduct the ordinary and necessary expenses incurred in carrying on a trade or business. See sec. 162(a). Items specified in section 162(a) are allowed as deductions, subject to exceptions listed in section 261. See sec. 161. Section 261 provides that “no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part.” The phrase “this part” refers to part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1, entitled “Items Not Deductible”. “

David J. & Mary K. Lychuk, Petitioner 116 T.C. No. 27 · 2001

deductibility provision of section 162(a). See INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. at 84. Section 161 provides that “there shall be allowed as deductions the items specified in * * * [section 162(a)], subject to the exceptions provided in * * * sec. 261 and following, relating to items not deductible”. Section 261 provides that “no deduction - 21 - shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part”; i.e., part IX (Items Not Deductible). Section 263 is included in p

James E. & Mary Jo Blasius, Petitioner 116 T.C. No. 27 · 2001

deductibility provision of section 162(a). See INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. at 84. Section 161 provides that “there shall be allowed as deductions the items specified in * * * [section 162(a)], subject to the exceptions provided in * * * sec. 261 and following, relating to items not deductible”. Section 261 provides that “no deduction - 21 - shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part”; i.e., part IX (Items Not Deductible). Section 263 is included in p

Arsen Garibyan, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2025-105 · 2025

ient. Lakeview’s nurses and intake specialists inputted all patients’ medical records, billing, revenue, and HIPAA6 compliance information into Consolo. 6 The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), Pub. L. No. 104-191, §§ 261–264, 110 Stat. 1936, 2021–34, contains privacy rules and gave rise to privacy regulations relating to individually identifiable health information. 6 [*6] Lakeview was assigned a representative at Consolo who generated monthly reports that deta

at 180–81; see also Gonzales v.

- 10 - Section 261, in part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Code, provides that “no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part.” Section 280E is in part IX.

- 10 - Section 261, in part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Code, provides that “no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part.” Section 280E is in part IX.

- 10 - Section 261, in part IX of subchapter B of chapter 1 of the Code, provides that “no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part.” Section 280E is in part IX.

at 180-181; see also Gonzales v.

164 provides that certain taxes shall be deductible for the tax year in which they are paid or accrued.

Section 261, however, provides that "[i]n computing taxable income, no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect ofthe items specified in this part." "[T]his part" includes section 280E, Expenditures in Connection With the Illegal Sale ofDrugs.

Section 261, however, provides that "[i]n computing taxable income, no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect ofthe items specified in this part." "[T]his part" includes section 280E, Expenditures in Connection With the Illegal Sale ofDrugs.

Section 261, however, provides that "[i]n computing taxable income, no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect ofthe items specified in this part." "[T]his part" includes section 280E, Expenditures in Connection With the Illegal Sale ofDrugs.

Section 261, however, provides that "[i]n computing taxable income, no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect ofthe items specified in this part." "[T]his part" includes section 280E, Expenditures in Connection With the Illegal Sale ofDrugs.

Section 261, however, provides that "[i]n computing taxable income, no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect ofthe items specified in this part." "[T]his part" includes section 280E, Expenditures in Connection With the Illegal Sale ofDrugs.

Section 261, however, provides that "[i]n computing taxable income, no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect ofthe items specified in this part." "[T]his part" includes section 280E, Expenditures in Connection With the Illegal Sale ofDrugs.

and his patent is recorded in the PTO. See 4 secs. 152-53. An "assignment, grant or conveyance shall be void as against any subsequent purchaser or mortgagee for a valuable consideration, without notice, unless it is recorded in the * * * [PTO]." Il sec. 261. Block Developers never recorded a security interest in the Verdura Block patents and never recorded the purported assignment with the PTO. 7 Maxam testified during trial that he arrived at 10% after extensive negotiations. He consulted an a

and his patent is recorded in the PTO. See 4 secs. 152-53. An "assignment, grant or conveyance shall be void as against any subsequent purchaser or mortgagee for a valuable consideration, without notice, unless it is recorded in the * * * [PTO]." Il sec. 261. Block Developers never recorded a security interest in the Verdura Block patents and never recorded the purported assignment with the PTO. 7 Maxam testified during trial that he arrived at 10% after extensive negotiations. He consulted an a

and his patent is recorded in the PTO. See 4 secs. 152-53. An "assignment, grant or conveyance shall be void as against any subsequent purchaser or mortgagee for a valuable consideration, without notice, unless it is recorded in the * * * [PTO]." Il sec. 261. Block Developers never recorded a security interest in the Verdura Block patents and never recorded the purported assignment with the PTO. 7 Maxam testified during trial that he arrived at 10% after extensive negotiations. He consulted an a

and his patent is recorded in the PTO. See 4 secs. 152-53. An "assignment, grant or conveyance shall be void as against any subsequent purchaser or mortgagee for a valuable consideration, without notice, unless it is recorded in the * * * [PTO]." Il sec. 261. Block Developers never recorded a security interest in the Verdura Block patents and never recorded the purported assignment with the PTO. 7 Maxam testified during trial that he arrived at 10% after extensive negotiations. He consulted an a

uded within part VI is section 161. That section provides as follows: In computing taxable income under section 63, there shall be allowed as deductions the items specified in this part (i.e., part VI], subiect to the exceptions provided in part IX (sec. 261 and following, relating to items not deductible). [Emphasis added.] Section 261, which is entitled "General Rule For Disallowance Of Deductions", provides that "In computing taxable income no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect

Horace D'Angelo, Jr., Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2003-295 · 2003

This is because other sections, such as section 261, except certain payments from the current deductibility provisions.

261-1, reprinted from Kitagawa, Doing Business in Japan, app. 5A (1994). Thus, Burndy-US could not nominate a fifth member of the board of directors to serve as president unless Furukawa and Sumitomo agreed. ii. Breaking Tie Votes Petitioners contend that Burndy-US had the power to break a tie vote of the Burndy-Japan board of directors becaus

261-1, reprinted from Kitagawa, Doing Business in Japan, app. 5A (1994). Thus, Burndy-US could not nominate a fifth member of the board of directors to serve as president unless Furukawa and Sumitomo agreed. ii. Breaking Tie Votes Petitioners contend that Burndy-US had the power to break a tie vote of the Burndy-Japan board of directors becaus

Michael A. & Frances Y. McGrath, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2002-231 · 2002

s not taking title or in which he has no equity. 8 SEC. 161. ALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTIONS. In computing taxable income under section 63, there shall be allowed as deductions the items specified in this part, subject to the exceptions provided in part IX (sec. 261 and following, relating to items not deductible). 9 SEC. 261. GENERAL RULE FOR DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTIONS. In computing taxable income no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part. 10 Sec. 263(a)(1

Section 261 sets forth the general rule for the disallowance of deductions by stating that “In computing taxable income no deduction shall in any case be allowed in respect of the items specified in this part.”2 Section 262 sets forth another general rule, namely, that “no deduction shall be allowed for personal, living, or family expenses.” It has

Norman E. Duquette, Inc., Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2001-3 · 2001

was in Mobile, Alabama, and he attempted to deduct as traveling 5 Sec. 161 provides: “In computing taxable income under section 63, there shall be allowed as deductions the items specified in this part, subject to the exceptions provided in part IX (sec. 261 and following, relating to items not deductible).” - 24 - expenses the costs he incurred in making trips from Jackson to Mobile and his expenditures for meals and hotel rooms while in Mobile. See id. at 468-469. With respect to the pursuit-o

1934). Section 162(a) allows a deduction for a taxpayer’s “ordinary and necessary” business expenses paid or incurred during the taxable year. However, deductions allowed under section 162(a) are also “subject to the exceptions provided in part IX (sec. 261 and following, relating to items not deductible).” Sec. 161. The uniform capitalization rules of section 263A(a)(1) require that all direct costs and certain indirect costs allocable to certain property be included in inventory, or capitalize

FMR Corp. and Subsidiaries, Petitioner 110 T.C. No. 30 · 1998

161 provides that the deductibility of the items specified in part VI of the Code (secs.

29 and Part IX (which includes section 261 and following, relating to items not deductible) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Pleasures of San Patricio, Inc. v. Méndez-Torres 596 F.3d 1 · Cir.
FMR Corp. v. Commissioner 110 T.C. 402 · 1998
MacDonald v. Commissioner 55 T.C. 840 · 1971
Lychuk v. Commissioner 116 T.C. 374 · 2001
Big Sandy Rancheria Enters. v. Rob Bonta 1 F.4th 710 · Cir.
PNC Bancorp, Inc. v. Commissioner 110 T.C. 349 · 1998
Saviano v. Commissioner 80 T.C. 955 · 1983
Eickmeyer v. Commissioner 66 T.C. 109 · 1976
Robertson v. Commissioner 55 T.C. 862 · 1971
Poole v. Commissioner 46 T.C. 392 · 1966
Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. John Hancock Life Insurance 582 F.3d 721 · Cir.
Olive v. Commissioner 792 F.3d 1146 · Cir.
Hoosier Energy Rural Electric v. John Hancock Life Insurance Co · Cir.
Hoosier Energy Rural Electric v. John Hancock Life Insurance Co · Cir.
Hoosier Energy Rural Electric v. John Hancock Life Insurance Co · Cir.
Wal-Mart Puerto Rico, Inc. v. Zaragoza-Gomez 834 F.3d 110 · Cir.
Silva v. Garland 27 F.4th 95 · Cir.
Pnc Bancorp, Inc., Successor to First National Pennsylvania Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Tax Court No. 95-16002) Pnc Bancorp, Inc., Transferee of Assets of First National Pennsylvania Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Tax Court No. 95-16003) Pnc Bancorp, Inc., Successor to United Federal Bancorp, Inc., and Subsidiaries v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Tax Court No. 96-16109) Pnc Bancorp, Inc., Transferee of Assets of United Federal Bancorp, Inc., and Subsidiaries v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Tax Court No. 96-16110) Pnc Bancorp, Inc., as (I) Successor to First National Pennsylvania Corporation, (Ii) Transferee of Assets of First National Pennsylvania Corporation, (Iii) Successor to United Federal Bancorp, Inc., and Subsidiaries, and (Iv) Transferee of Assets of United Federal Bancorp, Inc., and Subsidiaries 212 F.3d 822 · Cir.