Private ruling: work related expenses - clothing
Published: September 2011
Ruling period: Year ended 30 June 2010 | Year ended 30 June 2011
Date scheme commenced: 1 July 2009

Ruling: Q1: Are you entitled to a deduction for the cost of jeans worn in your employment? | A1: No

Relevant facts and circumstances: You are employed. You wear jeans to work to protect you against the sun, insects and abrasions. You submit that your jeans become so soiled from your work use that they are not suitable for any other use.

Relevant legislative provisions: Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 8-1

Reasons for decision: Summary: You are not entitled to a deduction for the cost of the jeans that you wear to work as they are private in nature. | Detailed Reasoning - Detailed reasoning: Section 8-1 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1 997 (ITAA 1997) allows a deduction for all losses and outgoings to the extent to which they are incurred in gaining or producing assessable income except where the outgoings are of a capital, private or domestic nature, or relate to the earning of exempt income. Taxation Ruling TR 97/12 considers the deductibility of work related clothing, uniform and footwear expenses. The ruling states that generally the cost of buying clothing will be regarded as an expense of a private nature. Clothing is necessary for protection of the body from the elements and to meet social norms of modesty, fashion or similar conditions. The circumstances where expenditure for clothing is considered to be deductible are where the clothing is: · occupation specific clothing · a compulsory uniform/wardrobe · a non-compulsory uniform/wardrobe · protective clothing and footwear. | Detailed Reasoning - Occupation specific clothing: Occupation specific clothing distinctively identifies the wearer as a person associated with a particular profession, trade, vocation, occupation or calling. Examples are cleric's ceremonial robes, a barrister's robes, a chef's chequered trousers and a nurse's traditional uniform. | Detailed Reasoning - Compulsory uniform/wardrobe: A compulsory uniform/wardrobe must be prescribed by the employer in an express policy which makes it a requirement for the employees to wear that uniform while at work. The uniform/wardrobe needs to be sufficiently distinctive so that the casual observer can clearly identify the employee as working for the particular employer. An example of this is a bank's corporate wardrobe with the corporate logo or emblem clearly visible. | Detailed Reasoning - Non-compulsory uniform/wardrobe: A non-compulsory uniform/wardrobe is a set of one or more items of clothing that distinctively identifies the wearer as a person associated, directly or indirectly, with an employer. A deduction is only allowable for a non-compulsory uniform/wardrobe where the design of the uniform/wardrobe has been entered on the Register of Approved Occupational Clothing that is maintained by the Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources. An example of this may be a polo shirt with the business' registered logo embroidered on it. | Detailed Reasoning - Protective clothing and footwear: Taxation Ruling TR 2003/16 provides guidelines on the deductibility of protective items, including footwear used for protection against injury. Expenditure on a protective item will have a sufficient connection with the earning of your assessable income where: · you are exposed to the risk of illness or injury in the course of carrying out your income earning activities · the risk is not remote or negligible - it would be a real risk to anyone who worked where you are required to work · the protective clothing is of a kind that provides protection from that risk and would reasonably be expected to be used in the circumstances · you use the item in the course of carrying out your income earning activities. | Detailed Reasoning - Deductibility of conventional clothing including jeans: Conventional clothing is 'everyday' clothing that would ordinarily be worn, or which could reasonably be worn, by a person irrespective of whether that person is working or not, for example, a pair of jeans or a shirt. While there is no universal rule that conventional clothing can never be deductible, in most cases expenditure on conventional clothing will not be deductible. TR 2003/16 discusses, at paragraph 37, denim jeans and similar items of clothing: Conventional clothing you wear at work, such as jeans, drill shirts and shorts, trousers and socks, may have some protective qualities. However, this in itself is not necessarily sufficient to give your expenditure on these items the character of a working expense. The limited level of protection against illness or injury in the workplace which this clothing gives you usually means that the essential character of the expenditure is private. In your case, your jeans protect you against the sun, insects and abrasions, however this is insufficient to classify jeans as an item of protective clothing. Your application refers us to the deductibility of shearers' jeans in TR 2003/16. The ruling points out that certain items, like jeans which repel lanolin, are deductible because they are made specially for shearers. The ruling goes on to state that if the jeans were ordinary clothing rather than protective types made specially for shearers they would not be able to claim a deduction for the cost of the clothing (paragraph 55). Your application also states that your jeans become so soiled at work that they are useless for conventional use. The soiling of your work clothes is not something peculiar to your occupation. For example, builders, painters, mechanics, gardeners, etc have work environments where clothing is exposed to harsh conditions and is soiled to the point where it can't be worn outside of work. Soiling is readily preventable by the wearing of protective overalls. Therefore, the cost of purchasing jeans to wear to work is not deductible under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997. The expenditure has the essential character of a private expense.

Please check this edited version to be sure that there are no details remaining that you think may allow you to be identified. If you have any concerns about this ruling you wish to discuss, you will find our contact details in the fact sheet.