Excerpted from the DesM Register..........

The government sued to stop Lemmon, 59, and her firm from doing further business. The IRS allegedly found problems in 224 of the 243 returns - an average of $2,600 each - filed by the firm between 2003 and 2008.

Lemmon allegedly told some truck drivers they could deduct DVDs and televisions as a "meals and entertainment" ex- pense that was not reimbursed by their employers. In another case, Lemmon allegedly advised a driver that he could deduct sunglasses, hand cleaner, coffeepots, televisions and razors as business expenses.

The lawsuit contends that Lemmon concocted deductions for charitable contributions and helped self-employed clients create "sham corporations" that made their business income appear lower than it was.
*******************************************

The charitable deductions problem is probably the most telling.

The sunglasses would be a no-no----------UNLESS the employer required such of all professional drivers.

So, the real problem here, it would appear, is that the employers were not on board, AND I would guess she was taking the indicated items IN ADDITION to the usual DOT per diems.........which are designed to cover meals AND INCIDENTALS.

The hand cleaner, coffee pot, etc etc would be usual "office" items, and should come under the deminimus fringe benefits rules---------if the employer paid for them.

My sleepers have tvs, etc in them..............just as important to keeping the drivers happy while out overnight as the bed in the sleeper..............but I----the employer----------am paying for them.........and therefore am making the items part of the job atmosphere.

Sounds like she just got greedy..................and, of course, the article would not most likely have been written by a tax-based person, so probably a lot of mis-stated items.

The agent this AM did mention a preparer from "up north" who was getting hit............didn't give out any names, etc but I bet this woman is the one to whom he was referring.

If items are part of the job.............the employer will most likely provide them....or reimburse for them.......and that makes everything ducky.

My reaction is that the article is more intended by the IRS to scare preparers than it is to shake up the truckers.   Scare one preparer, and the IRS has effectively audited say, 100 tax returns.

Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered.