United States v. Correll

Because he would eat breakfast and lunch on the road, he deducted the cost of those meals from his 1960 and 1961 income tax return pursuant to § 162(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Second, the requirement that the taxpayer must sleep away from home in order to qualify for a § 162(a)(2) deduction is a bright-line, easy to administer rule that avoids unnecessary litigation.

[7] “In this area of limitless factual variations, ‘it is the province of Congress and the Commissioner, not the courts, to make the appropriate adjustments.’”[2] Justices Douglas, Black and Fortas dissented on the ground that the phrase “while away from home” goes to geography and not time.

[2] The dissent argued that the majority’s approach of interpreting the phrase as “overnight” incorrectly switches the focus to a time element.

Furthermore, the decision puts all one-day travelers forced to pay for their meals on an equal footing when it comes to allowing a § 162(a)(2) business expense deduction.