A T O home
Legal Database
Access the database 
Browse database
View last document
Quick access 
View legislation
View a document
Email Cross Reference Material Previous/Next Section Contents Previous/Next Result
Printable version

ATO Interpretative Decision

ATO ID 2001/7 (Withdrawn)

Income Tax
Deductions: Clothing Expenses

Attention This ATO ID is withdrawn as the interpretative issue is covered in Taxation Ruling TR 98/14.
Attention This document has changed over time. View its history.
FOI status: may be released
Status of this decision: Decision Withdrawn 1 April 2010

CautionCAUTION: This is an edited and summarised record of a Tax Office decision. This record is not published as a form of advice. It is being made available for your inspection to meet FOI requirements, because it may be used by an officer in making another decision.

This ATOID provides you with the following level of protection:

If you reasonably apply this decision in good faith to your own circumstances (which are not materially different from those described in the decision), and the decision is later found to be incorrect you will not be liable to pay any penalty or interest. However, you will be required to pay any underpaid tax (or repay any over-claimed credit, grant or benefit), provided the time limits under the law allow it. If you do intend to apply this decision to your own circumstances, you will need to ensure that the relevant provisions referred to in the decision have not been amended or repealed. You may wish to obtain further advice from the Tax Office or from a professional adviser.


Whether expenditure by the television presenter on clothing and personal care products is allowable as a deduction under section 51(1) (Income Tax Assessment Act 1936) against assessable income.


Expenditure by the television presenter on clothing and personal care products is not allowable as a deduction under section 51(1) (Income Tax Assessment Act 1936) against assessable income.


The taxpayer is a television presenter. As a television presenter, the taxpayer is expected to be presented impeccably and consequently incurs expense in relation to conventional clothing, dry cleaning, hair colouring and cuts, facials and make-up products far in excess of normal requirements.

Reasons For Decision

For expenditure by an employee to be deductible, the expenditure must have the essential character of an outgoing incurred in gaining assessable income. It is not sufficient that the expenditure is a prerequisite to the derivation of assessable income. It must contribute to the derivation of that income.

The clothing purchased by the taxpayer is not part of a uniform nor of a special nature to be worn in unusual circumstances (cf FC of T v Edwards 1994 ATC 4255; (1994) 28 ATR 87). Expense incurred by the taxpayer in relation to clothing is incurred in order for the taxpayer to be able to commence her work duties and is private in nature. Similarly, the expenditure on hairdressing, cosmetics and other personal grooming products purchased by the taxpayer is of a private nature regardless of the amount of expenditure involved.

Date of decision: 6 April 1998

Legislative references:
Income Tax Assessment Act 1936
   section 51(1)

Case references:
Case 72/96
   1996 ATC 640

AAT Case 11,455
   (1996) 34 ATR 1098

FC of T v. Edwards
   1994 ATC 4255
   (1994) 28 ATR 87

Lunney v. FC of T
   (1958) 100 CLR 478

Mansfield v. FC of T
   1996 ATC 4001
   (1996) 31 ATR 367

Ronpibon Tin v. FC of T
   (1949) 78 CLR 47

Related Public Rulings (including Determinations)
TR 94/22
TR 96/17
TR 96/18
TR 95/20

Deductions and expenses
Clothing expenses
Grooming expenses

Business line: Small Business/Individual Taxpayers

Date of publication: 4 June 2001

ISSN: 1445-2782

ATO ID 2001/7 (Withdrawn) history   Top  
   Date   Version 
    6 April 1998   Original statement   
 You are here ®   1 April 2010   Withdrawn   


Top of page
More information on page