Commissioner v. Soliman

Commissioner v. Soliman, 506 U.S. 168 (1993), was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court in which the court decided whether a portion of a dwelling unit exclusively used as a principal place of business for any trade or business of a taxpayer would allow a deduction to the taxpayer's income taxes under Internal Revenue Code Section 280A(c)(1)(A).

Commissioner v. Soliman
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued October 5, 1992 Decided January 12, 1993
Full case name	Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Nader E. Soliman
Citations	506 U.S. 168 (more) 113 S.Ct. 701; 121 L. Ed. 2d 634; 1993 U.S. LEXIS 828
Case history
Prior	Soliman v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 20 (1990); affirmed, 935 F.2d 52 (4th Cir. 1991); cert. granted, 503 U.S. 935 (1992).
Holding
All locations where the taxpayer works must be compared and only one of those places will be considered the principal place of business.
Court membership
Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices Byron White · Harry Blackmun John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy David Souter · Clarence Thomas
Case opinions
Majority	Kennedy, joined by Rehnquist, White, Blackmun, O'Connor, Souter
Concurrence	Blackmun
Concurrence	Thomas, joined by Scalia
Dissent	Stevens
Laws applied
Internal Revenue Code §280A(c)(1)(A)

Soliman was an anesthesiologist who spent thirty to thirty-five hours per week with patients at three different hospitals but none of the hospitals provided him with an office. He used a spare bedroom in his house for contacting patients and surgeons, maintaining billing records, preparing for treatments, and reading medical journals.

The Supreme Court denied Soliman's home office deduction setting forth a two consideration test for whether the home was the taxpayer's principal place of business: (1) the relative importance of the activities performed, and (2) time spent at each place.

Congress's reaction to this decision was to amend Section 280A(c) in the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 so that a home office could meet the "principal place of business" test if it is the only fixed location where administrative or management activities are performed. This effectively nullified the Supreme Court's decision ruling in the Soliman case.

See also

• List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 506

Further reading

• Gerlack, R. J. (1993). "What Has the Supreme Court Done—The Home Office Deductions Is Virtually Eliminated after Soliman". Cleveland State Law Review. 41: 789. ISSN 0009-8876.
• Hulsey, G. S. (1992). "Soliman Leaves Uncertainty in the Area of Home Office Deductions: Suggested Guidelines". Tax Lawyer. 46 (4): 947. ISSN 0040-005X.

External links

• Text of Commissioner v. Soliman, 506 U.S. 168 (1993) is available from: Cornell CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)