police officer meal deduction

[mblatour]

This is a first for me. New client. His previous tax preparer (well known in our area) allowed a $7 per day meal deduction for his on duty meals. He works 10 hour shifts, 2000 hours per year. Under my calculations, that's $1400.

Previous preparer put it under 2106, line 5, column B (meals & entertainment) for the amount of $1500.

Client says the preparer has always allowed it. So far, I can't find anything allowing it in TTB or online (I've got 20 minutes into research before posting this). I see TTB allows for firefighters, but says nothing about police officers.

Anyone know about this? Thanks in advance!

Becky

[Roland Slugg]

It's like an urban legend

Dear Becky

This non-existent deduction has been discussed ad nauseum on other BBs, and perhaps even on this one in the past. Nobody can deduct a standard $7 meal allowance ... or any other amount ... for his normal work day. Employees and self-employed T/Ps who are away from home overnight, on business, can deduct either actual expenses or the federal per-diem M&IE amount (which is now $52 per day, I believe).

Firefighters may be able to deduct meal expenses when they are required to stay at the station for long periods. Whatever TTB says about this is probably correct.

A couple years ago I remember reading a Rev Rul about this issue, but I couldn't find it just now in a quick search. It was an old one ... from the 1950's or 60's as I recall.

[ChEAr$]

public safety officers

Dear Becky

This non-existent deduction has been discussed ad nauseum on other BBs, and perhaps even on this one in the past. Nobody can deduct a standard $7 meal allowance ... or any other amount ... for his normal work day. Employees and self-employed T/Ps who are away from home overnight, on business, can deduct either actual expenses or the federal per-diem M&IE amount (which is now $52 per day, I believe).

Firefighters may be able to deduct meal expenses when they are required to stay at the station for long periods. Whatever TTB says about this is probably correct.

A couple years ago I remember reading a Rev Rul about this issue, but I couldn't find it just now in a quick search. It was an old one ... from the 1950's or 60's as I recall.

Firefighters, yes, IF they are REQUIRED by the municipality to contribute to company mess.

As for the "police' case, that was about 1987, 88, 89, and involved ONLY Minnesota
state troopers who were required to take meals at restaurants along the Interstate so they
could be on call throughout their tour of duty and thus able to get out the door and on the way
to the emergency. Former client, local police chief, wanted to use this to deduct his meals,
but.... well,,, former client.

[mblatour]

Thanks guys.....

I did a search on TTB board for past posts and nothing popped up from the words I typed in. I tried a few combos'. But I truly appreciate you letting me know what you've learned as I missed those older posts.

Chears.....I was pointed to that same case you mentioned by Larry M from this board. I'm glad to know a few people know of that case. It helps to have it on file for future reference; however little this may come up in the future; still helps.

[railtax]

Police Meals

I have put down "meal interupts" for police officers for years. It is used when they are on a meal break and they are required to end their break and respond to a call. Firefighters that I have (FDNY) contribute to what is called a Firehouse tax. Each member is required to contribute money for essentials.

[mblatour]

Interesting thread re: meals

Check out this thread when you have a good 1/2 hour to read the whole thing. WOW is all I can say.

http://www.taxalmanac.org/index.php/Discussion:Firefighter_--_Meals_while_on_24_hr_shift

[taxwoman16]

MN Police Meals Deduction

The background is that a U.S. Court of Appeals case from Minnesota, involving the MN State Troopers. The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that these troopers could deduct the cost of their on-duty meals because of the restrictions their management placed on them. They were not only required to eat in their beat, they were required to eat in public view in a restaurant. They did not have the option to go hide somewhere such as the station so that the public would not bother them. They could not even bring their own lunch. They were, therefore, required to spend money in a restaurant so as to stay in public view. The Court found these circumstances so compelling that they overruled the IRS and allowed the troopers to deduct their meals. However, IRS did not like this opinion, and simply said they would not follow it. They said they would only follow the decision as it applied to the identical circumstances of the Minnesota troopers, and then, only in the 8th Circuit. The position the IRS took was "nonacquiescence".

[bertrans]

Excellent site. Thanks!