Appearance Clothing

[Burke]

Deductiblity of work clothes for an individual are restricted by the "not suitable for everyday wear" caveat. Pub 17 even discounts the white bib overalls worn by a painter, and the blue work clothes purchased by a welder. I have always used the definition of "uniform" to classify deductible clothing as having the name of the company, etc labeled on them. My question concerns clothing (which may encompass evening gowns and formal wear) required for appearances by a celebrity whose main income is from public speaking/appearances.

[Jiggers]

Nope

Deductiblity of work clothes for an individual are restricted by the "not suitable for everyday wear" caveat. Pub 17 even discounts the white bib overalls worn by a painter, and the blue work clothes purchased by a welder. I have always used the definition of "uniform" to classify deductible clothing as having the name of the company, etc labeled on them. My question concerns clothing (which may encompass evening gowns and formal wear) required for appearances by a celebrity whose main income is from public speaking/appearances.

I don't think that is any different from those of us that wear coat/ties or pant suits because we want to impress our clients.

[solomon]

Agree with Jiggers. Evening gowns for public speaking and appearances?

[Lion]

Performance Clothing

A distant cousin of my husband's is a CPA, and she deducted her husband's tuxedo as "performance clothing" that he wears as a violinist performing with various symphonies. Something to look in to...

[Jiggers]

You can deduct anything....

A distant cousin of my husband's is a CPA, and she deducted her husband's tuxedo as "performance clothing" that he wears as a violinist performing with various symphonies. Something to look in to...

You can deduct anything, as long as you don't get caught!

[erchess]

However

where is it written that the employer's name or other info has to be on the outside? Someone could have a self promoting message embroidered on the inside and they could get a deduction for the clothes and this would hold up until Congress changed things.

[erchess]

Seriously

There was a case several years ago where a member of some Symphony lost deductions for most of the clothing she wears while performing. even though she does in fact not wear on the street any of the outerwear items that she wears to performances. However she was able to convince the court that the orchestra wanted her to wear a blouse with many sequins and that these sequins made the blouses unsuitable for street wear. Before that there was a case in which members of a rock band of some kind were able to convince the court to let them deduct expenses for all their performance clothes because these clothes were too gaudy and garish for street wear. However I don't see how either of these cases shields a garden variety tux even if it is in fact worn only during paid performances.

[travis bickle]

Just so that I can keep things straight

There was a case several years ago where a member of some Symphony lost deductions for most of the clothing she wears while performing. even though she does in fact not wear on the street any of the outerwear items that she wears to performances. However she was able to convince the court that the orchestra wanted her to wear a blouse with many sequins and that these sequins made the blouses unsuitable for street wear. Before that there was a case in which members of a rock band of some kind were able to convince the court to let them deduct expenses for all their performance clothes because these clothes were too gaudy and garish for street wear. However I don't see how either of these cases shields a garden variety tux even if it is in fact worn only during paid performances.

because I have had clients with this very type of issue -- can/will you please list some citation(s) which form the basis for the above?

Thanks in advance,

[erchess]

Travis

A quick look through Kleinrock's Federal Tax expert turned up the following cases which are not the two I mentioned. They are however the root cases for entertainers and musicians.

20/ Fisher v. Commissioner, 23 T.C. 218 (1954), aff'd, 230 F.2d 79 (7th Cir. 1956); Nelson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1966-224.

I got the two I mentioned out of either Quickfinder the last year I used them or TTB the first time I used them. My memory is hazy but last year was either my first or second year with TTB. If anyone with TTB feels like checking the record and posting the first year I used TTB I don't mind.

Of course you are aware that there are broadly speaking two tests and both must be satisfied. The clothes must be absolutely required for the job and in one case the request of a foreman was held not to be enough for a worker. The clothes must also be not suitable for street wear and the only ironclad rule seems to be that the worker's name or the name of the firm or the union will satisfy this requirement but on the other hand if these are lacking the system may be open to the taxpayer's argument.

[joanmcq]

I heard of one celebrity winning a case for a gown that she was literally stiched into, after proving it was so tight she could not sit down. But besides that one, no.

[solomon]

TC 2008-132 Summary partially dealt with clothing.

http://www.ustaxcourt.gov/InOpHistoric/GONZA9LEZ.SUM.WPD.pdf

[veritas]

Rhinestones on clothing

There was a case several years ago where a member of some Symphony lost deductions for most of the clothing she wears while performing. even though she does in fact not wear on the street any of the outerwear items that she wears to performances. However she was able to convince the court that the orchestra wanted her to wear a blouse with many sequins and that these sequins made the blouses unsuitable for street wear. Before that there was a case in which members of a rock band of some kind were able to convince the court to let them deduct expenses for all their performance clothes because these clothes were too gaudy and garish for street wear. However I don't see how either of these cases shields a garden variety tux even if it is in fact worn only during paid performances.

are helpful. I believe Liberace had some success.

[DonPriebe]

(Non-tax) Symphony Dress Code

There was a case several years ago where a member of some Symphony lost deductions for most of the clothing she wears while performing. even though she does in fact not wear on the street any of the outerwear items that she wears to performances. However she was able to convince the court that the orchestra wanted her to wear a blouse with many sequins and that these sequins made the blouses unsuitable for street wear.

Our dress code is just the opposite. The rationale is that jewelery or flashy garb tends to distract the audience from the music. This applies to to orchestra and choral support, but not to soloists.

There was much discussion about ear rings for male performers. The final outcome was nicknamed the "discrete stud rule" I believe that "stud" referred to to jewelry, not the wearer.

[Gary]

No Problem

I prepared returns for two strippers, and had no trouble taking their costumes as an expense!!!

[travis bickle]

Thanks for the quick response

A quick look through Kleinrock's Federal Tax expert turned up the following cases which are not the two I mentioned. They are however the root cases for entertainers and musicians.

20/ Fisher v. Commissioner, 23 T.C. 218 (1954), aff'd, 230 F.2d 79 (7th Cir. 1956); Nelson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1966-224.

I got the two I mentioned out of either Quickfinder the last year I used them or TTB the first time I used them. My memory is hazy but last year was either my first or second year with TTB. If anyone with TTB feels like checking the record and posting the first year I used TTB I don't mind.

Of course you are aware that there are broadly speaking two tests and both must be satisfied. The clothes must be absolutely required for the job and in one case the request of a foreman was held not to be enough for a worker. The clothes must also be not suitable for street wear and the only ironclad rule seems to be that the worker's name or the name of the firm or the union will satisfy this requirement but on the other hand if these are lacking the system may be open to the taxpayer's argument.

I will have to take a look at the above cites when I am literally not falling asleep.

To Gary --

yes, I have done a few exotic dancers also; and, obviously, no problem with their costumes.