View Single Post
  #20  
Old 07-09-2019, 01:33 PM
michelej1 michelej1 is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: California
Posts: 25,073
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbrownsjr View Post
Those black gloves get smelly. Lots of $$ to replace.
Hey, you were her tax attorney weren't you? I thought I recognized you! It sounds like she is a sweaty, smelly mess.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-...545-story.html

Quote:
"much of this clothing is discarded immediately after use because it simply cannot be reused, given the energy levels of [Nicks'] performances and the heat generated on stage from lights and physical exertion."
But economical:

Quote:
Short adds, "When not performing, [Nicks'] makeup and hair-styling needs are minimal" so she doesn't claim them as a business expense then.
Quote:
Over the years, Nicks has projected a gypsy-like persona on stage. In her tax papers, lawyer George G. Short of Santa Barbara argues that her hair and clothing "must be themed to each performance, is not suitable for ordinary wear and is not adaptable to [Nicks'] general or continued use." She is required "to maintain a stage persona and appearance which is unlike her everyday persona and appearance."
You're telling me.

Quote:
Nicks also appeals $119,291 claimed as a business expense for payments to her personal manager, along with an additional $33,750 to write off an investment she made in the album "Buckingham-Nicks," which she and fellow Fleetwood Mac member Lindsey Buckingham jointly financed in 1974. That album was overshadowed by the success of Fleetwood Mac's albums, court papers say, and the two decided in 1991 to abandon any efforts to continue to promote it.
So, they didn't decide to stop promoting Buckingham Nicks until 1991? That doggone Lindsey. He's been costing her money all of her life.
Reply With Quote