Is The Mac/Stevie mentioned in Bill's book?

[Nixxxed]

I hear there's an index to Bill Clinton's book, I just haven't made it to the book store to check it out for myself...

(And please spare me and the world the rest of the book's details if you've bought it -- I've heard enough about Monica Blewhimsky this week. :D )

[gldstwmn]

Don't know yet. As soon as mine arrives, I'll check it out for you. The Big Dog was on Oprah yesterday and he said his editor told him "You can't put everyone you've ever met in this book." It's 975 pages.

[dissention]

I got it last night and have read about 200 pages so far. Not bad from what I've read, honestly. I'm not at the inauguration yet, so I can't say. We all know he's a big Stevie fan, so I'm sure there's a mention. ;)

[CarneVaca]

I shudder to think about what he might reveal in regards to his Stevie Nicks fantasies. Brrrrrrr...

[jbrownsjr]

I shudder to think about what he might reveal in regards to his Stevie Nicks fantasies. Brrrrrrr...

I second that! :lol:

[dissention]

I shudder to think about what he might reveal in regards to his Stevie Nicks fantasies. Brrrrrrr...

"...I told her we couldn't, that Hillary was in the next room, but she put soft Jasmine-scented finger to my lips delicately and told me to quiet. Her golden hair billowed past her shoulders and her black skirt blew off to the side as a gust of warm air filled the room. I was mesmerized. Then she turned around slowly...undoing the laces...saying she had met her match..."

[estranged4life]

"Did you have sexual relations with her?"

"No...I did not have sexual relations with her, You meant Hillary and not just Monica right? AH hell NO!!!

But after I saw those Two Birds Of Rhiannon of Ms.Stevie Nicks I thought to myself "Forget about finding those WMD's too...I wanna find my way into those laces and pet those pretty "Birds"."

[GypsySorcerer]

Well, in 900+ pages, surely he could mention Stevie and/or FM. :laugh:

[dissention]

But after I saw those Two Birds Of Rhiannon of Ms.Stevie Nicks I thought to myself "Forget about finding those WMD's too...I wanna find my way into those laces and pet those pretty "Birds"."

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[Merf]

"Did you have sexual relations with her?"

"No...I did not have sexual relations with her, You meant Hillary and not just Monica right? AH hell NO!!!

But after I saw those Two Birds Of Rhiannon of Ms.Stevie Nicks I thought to myself "Forget about finding those WMD's too...I wanna find my way into those laces and pet those pretty "Birds"."

Brian, you crack me up!!! :laugh:

Hillary mentioned FM in her book (a blurb about them appearing to surprise Bill at the going away party in 2001) so I wouldn't be surprised if Bill mentioned FM, too. :thumbsup:

[DeeGeMe]

People--check the index and get back to us! I love Bubba, I really do but I've got arthritis in my hands--I don't know that I could pick that book up--isn't it about equal in weight to a small dog or something?????

[darklinensuit]

I shudder to think about what he might reveal in regards to his Stevie Nicks fantasies. Brrrrrrr...

No worry. Does she even send BlackDress to the cleaners? :shrug: :)

- Jake

[strandinthewind]

No worry. Does she even send BlackDress to the cleaners? :shrug: :)

- Jake

According to her arguments to the IRS, the heat generated by one performance renders the garment obsolete :cool: :p :laugh: :laugh:

[gldstwmn]

People--check the index and get back to us! I love Bubba, I really do but I've got arthritis in my hands--I don't know that I could pick that book up--isn't it about equal in weight to a small dog or something?????

I got it today. It's not too heavy. There is no Fleetwood Mac listed in the index.

[Johnny Stew]

According to her arguments to the IRS, the heat generated by one performance renders the garment obsolete :cool: :p :laugh: :laugh:

I'm tellin' ya, it's the fault of that damned IRS, that she ONLY wears the black dress these days! :laugh:

"If they want 'stage clothes,' I'll give 'em stage clothes! This dress isn't coming off for the next four tours!"

[amber]

"...I told her we couldn't, that Hillary was in the next room, but she put soft Jasmine-scented finger to my lips delicately and told me to quiet. Her golden hair billowed past her shoulders and her black skirt blew off to the side as a gust of warm air filled the room. I was mesmerized. Then she turned around slowly...undoing the laces...saying she had met her match..."
:lol: :lol: :lol: :laugh: :lol: :xoxo:

[estranged4life]

Brian, you crack me up!!! :laugh:

to humor myself is all (I've been in a bit of pain today).

What isnt funny was the pamphlet on Klonopin (Which caught my eye because of the above mentioned Ms.Nicks) I picked up in the lobby of the clinic today (Deb had to go due her checkup today), That is some seriously messed up s--t.

[amber]

to humor myself is all (I've been in a bit of pain today).

What isnt funny was the pamphlet on Klonopin (Which caught my eye because of the above mentioned Ms.Nicks) I picked up in the lobby of the clinic today (Deb had to go due her checkup today), That is some seriously messed up s--t.

Is that how the pamphlet described it? Not a very smart sell, if so...
Amber

[estranged4life]

Is that how the pamphlet described it? Not a very smart sell, if so...
Amber

but reading what it's used to primarily treat (Panic Attack Disorder) is what I found it rather interesting, To say the least...Considering the history of the problems Stevie had when she was taking Klonopin (aka clonazepam).

The side effects are however what Stevie definitely suffered from during the "Street Angel" era (ie-Depression, Problems with coordination & balance).

Anyways, to get thing back on track...According to the reaction Slick Willie's book is having in the OKC area (And statewide) it will be available very soon...At your local "$1 shop"!!! It is not selling whatsoever (A newspaper used a comparison of the Harry Potter books with the Slick Willie book; "The Potter book's are at one end of the spectrum, In that they are a great seller for many of differnt age groups, Whereas the Clinton book is at the other end, With no interest from the book-reading public".)

[dissention]

According to her arguments to the IRS, the heat generated by one performance renders the garment obsolete :cool: :p :laugh: :laugh:

I couldn't believe she argued that. What a way to get out of paying her proper taxes. No one has BO that bad. :laugh:

[dissention]

Anyways, to get thing back on track...According to the reaction Slick Willie's book is having in the OKC area (And statewide) it will be available very soon...At your local "$1 shop"!!! It is not selling whatsoever (A newspaper used a comparison of the Harry Potter books with the Slick Willie book; "The Potter book's are at one end of the spectrum, In that they are a great seller for many of differnt age groups, Whereas the Clinton book is at the other end, With no interest from the book-reading public".)

:lol:

The front page of my local paper has a story about how well it's selling in our area. It's flying off the shelves and they can't keep up with demand.

[estranged4life]

:lol:

The front page of my local paper has a story about how well it's selling in our area. It's flying off the shelves and they can't keep up with demand.

on if ya liked Slick Willie in the first place, But it is funny because his Mrs. Hill-Billy's book overall sold much better in the land of Native America...Too bad the National Enquirer outsells 'em both :laugh:

I think Oklahoman's don't care for President's if they are from Ar-ki-saw & Tex-us

[Gwillaker]

I shudder to think about what he might reveal in regards to his Stevie Nicks fantasies. Brrrrrrr...

Good point. Homer Simpson claims to have seen Stevie Nekkid several times, so God only knows what Bill's been up to on the sly! ;)

[Johnny Stew]

I couldn't believe she argued that. What a way to get out of paying her proper taxes. No one has BO that bad. :laugh:

Granted, it does sound a bit far-fetched, but I can see how it could be true (otherwise Lindsey wouldn't need a dozen white t-shirts, etc.). And they didn't say that all of her stage clothes had to be discarded, just that some did, and it added up.

The one thing I've never found out, was whether or not Stevie won her appeals, or if she had to pay the full amount.

[strandinthewind]

Okay, this is an interesting article (kudos to the site)

http://bla.fleetwoodmac.net/index.php?page=index_v2&id=203&c=11

Los Angeles Times, 11/5/1996, Stevie Nicks in Flap with IRS < Stevie Nicks < Main Page

Los Angeles Times, 11/5/1996, Stevie Nicks in Flap with IRS



Stevie Nicks in Flap With IRS
By James Bates, Times Staff Writer
Los Angeles Times November 5th 1996

Stevie Nicks has good reason not to stop thinking about tomorrow: a looming Internal Revenue Service tax dispute. The IRS is seeking $85,887 in additional taxes from the former Fleetwood Mac singer, saying she improperly took about $270,000 in business expense deductions for makeup, hair styling, clothes a home office and management fees, according to U.S. Tax Court papers reviewed by The Times.

Among the expenses in dispute: $43,291 for clothes worn during performances, expenditures a Nicks lawyer in court documents defends as necessary because "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".

The case highlights an often murky tax question in the entertainment business: What can artists and performers reasonably claim is necessary to maintain carefully cultivated images?

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".

Short adds, "When not performing, (Nicks') makeup and hair-styling needs are minimal" so she doesn't claim them as a business expense then.

The Nicks case stems from an audit of her 1991 tax return. It has recently come to light in public documents, the result of her decision to appeal the case last month to Tax Court in Alexandria, Va. The majority of such tax disputes are rarely made public because they are usually settled in the early stages.

Nicks, whose real name is Stephanie, was virtually unknown until she joined Fleetwood Mac in the mid-1970's just before the group's career rocketed. With such albums as Fleetwood Mac and Rumours, the band became one of the biggest-selling rock groups of all time, recording such hits as "Rhiannon," "Over My Head," "Dreams" and "Don't Stop," which became the anthem of President Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign.

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.

Nicks also disputes an IRS decision disallowing $50,160 in expenses to maintain a business office in her Arizona home. In the petition, Short argues that Nicks used the office to compose songs, talk with advisors and executives and conduct her business as a songwriter and performer.

Finally, Short argues that Nicks also must spend money on private security services because she can attract unwanted attention "which disturbs and interrupts her trade, both while working from her home and when traveling on business." Short declined to comment on the case beyond what he wrote in court papers. An IRS spokesman said the agency does not comment on pending cases.

[strandinthewind]

Money Magazine, 6/97


How to keep your home office in tune with the IRS
By Michael Sivy, Wall Street Editor
Reprinted from Money Magazine, June, 1997

Now, Fleetwood Mac's Stevie Nicks can't stop thinkin' about yesterday-- because the IRS won't let her.

On her 1991 tax return, Nicks, whose band's '70s hit "Don't Stop (Thinking About Tomorrow)" became a Clinton Administration anthem, deducted $60,160 in expenses for a home office in her Arizona residence. But the IRS audited her return and nixed Nicks' write-offs (as well as $208,827 in deductions for pop-star-related expenses, like a personal manager and makeup). In all, the IRS says she owes $85,887 in back taxes.

Nicks, who declined to speak with MONEY, is currently fighting an uphill battle against the feds in tax court. Based on my experience as a tax lawyer and former IRS audit group manager, here's what Nicks will have to do to prevail over the IRS-- and what you can learn from her tax troubles.

In order to keep her write-offs, Nicks must first prove that the home office was her "principal place of business." That'll be difficult, since the IRS believes a musician's work is done mainly in recording studios and concert halls. (Similarly, a lawyer who makes most of her money defending clients in court probably couldn't get her home office expenses past the IRS.) So to salvage her deductions, Nicks will probably try to prove that her home office is the primary place for the various businesses she says she runs. Her petition, for example, lists a host of activities she conducted from the home office, including composing, writing poems, drawing and painting.

Nicks must also show that her home office was used "regularly and exclusively" for business. That argument could fall flat, especially for the write-offs attributed to the outdoor portions of her home, if she also uses the space for personal entertaining or relaxing.

My advice to Stevie and to you: In order to write off a legitimate home office, keep a separate business phone line there and take photographs to show that you have no personal items in this part of your home. Also, keep detailed records of the work you conduct in your office and a daily log of all business visitors. Finally, hang on to your canceled checks and receipts for all office expenses, so you can document your costs if the IRS comes calling.


(same site - same kudos!!!!)

http://bla.fleetwoodmac.net/index.php?page=index_v2&id=207&c=11

[strandinthewind]

Back to the topic of the thread, maybe he'll talk about the joke he made about Stevie at the 2001 RIAA Convention. :eek:

[dissention]

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.

Nicks also disputes an IRS decision disallowing $50,160 in expenses to maintain a business office in her Arizona home. In the petition, Short argues that Nicks used the office to compose songs, talk with advisors and executives and conduct her business as a songwriter and performer.

Finally, Short argues that Nicks also must spend money on private security services because she can attract unwanted attention "which disturbs and interrupts her trade, both while working from her home and when traveling on business." Short declined to comment on the case beyond what he wrote in court papers. An IRS spokesman said the agency does not comment on pending cases.

I find it offensive that she tried claim payments to her personal manager were business expenses. I guess I'll just do the same thing with my accountant. :rolleyes:

Her bodyguards have nothing to do with her business, either. Gimme a break.

I tried to claim my home office on my tax returns, but was told I couldn't because it wasn't my primary place of business. La Nicks shouldn't get a free ride because she's La Nicks. :laugh:

[dissention]

Back to the topic of the thread, maybe he'll talk about the joke he made about Stevie at the 2001 RIAA Convention. :eek:

That? Was a fabulous joke. :xoxo:

[strandinthewind]

I find it offensive that she tried claim payments to her personal manager were business expenses. I guess I'll just do the same thing with my accountant. :rolleyes:

Her bodyguards have nothing to do with her business, either. Gimme a break.

I tried to claim my home office on my tax returns, but was told I couldn't because it wasn't my primary place of business. La Nicks shouldn't get a free ride because she's La Nicks. :laugh:

Actually, I am pretty sure the IRS code allows payment to accountants for tax preparation as a legitimate expense :cool: - see the last few lines on the 1040 :cool:

Same for her personal manager if they are taking care of her business, which Karen, I think they are talking about her, does :shrug: I mean businesses deduct secretaries all of the time. Same for her bodyguards. That is all arguably legitimate in that she needs them when she is on tour. Now, at home - probably not because they are not conduting business. It also depends on how her business is set up, etc.

Home offices are VERY hard to deduct and most do not because it is a HUGE red flag for the IRS "random" ( :rolleyes: ) dept.

The thing about clothes was they had to be used solely for the job, like a uniform. Otherwise, I could deduct all of my suits, which is wrong because I can wear those suits for other things, etc. Stevie, on the other hand, probably cannot wear the SB cape to the Publix - but you never know :laugh:

The IRS code is fascinating - I strongly suggest everyone read it :laugh: It is at www.irs.gov Interestingly, the 1040 instruction booklet is a mini version of the personal tax code and WELL worth the read at tax time because the law/code changes all of the time.

[amber]

That? Was a fabulous joke. :xoxo:

You guys are teases. what was the joke? Also, why wouldn't bodyguards be a business expense? If she wasn't in her business, she wouldn't need them. I mean, I don't need bodyguards, you don't need bodyguards, but famous people usually do.

[strandinthewind]

From the Nicksfix (Kudos to John Kinney abd crew!!!!!)

R&R Convention - 2001
June 14-16, 2001
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nicks, Lynne Deliver Early Bird Performances



Former President Bill Clinton, a self-proclaimed Fleetwood Mac fan, served as Stevie Nicks' opening act Friday morning at R&R Convention 2001. Nicks admitted that she rarely performs live at 11am, but Island recording artist Shelby Lynne had an even earlier show time, at 9am. Regardless of the hour, Nicks and Lynne each delivered strong performances. Nicks' four-song set included material from her new album, Trouble in Shangri-La, including the current single, "Every Day." Nicks also appealed to Fleetwood Mac fans with the band's classic "Dreams." Lynne, who won a Best New Artist prize at this year's Grammys, performed material from her breakthrough album, I Am Shelby Lynne, and previewed new songs backed by a band that included ace guitarists Sonny Landreth and Michael Landau, and Little Feat keyboardist Bill Payne.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clinton Amused By Double-Entendre
When R&R Publisher/CEO Erica Farber led a Q&A with former President Bill Clinton following his keynote address and before Stevie Nicks' performance Friday, Farber noted that Clinton was a big Fleetwood Mac fan and asked, "When were you first exposed to Stevie Nicks?" After laughs from Clinton and the audience, Clinton replied, "I've never been exposed to Stevie Nicks!" The comment was received with wild applause.

[Johnny Stew]

Her bodyguards have nothing to do with her business, either. Gimme a break.

And how do you figure that? If she weren't in the music business, she most likely wouldn't need a bodyguard (since no one would know who she is, and therefore she most likely wouldn't have to worry about stalkers, etc.)... so, to me, that's a business expense.

I tried to claim my home office on my tax returns, but was told I couldn't because it wasn't my primary place of business. La Nicks shouldn't get a free ride because she's La Nicks.

No one is saying she should.
You said you tried to claim your home office, too... does that mean you expected a free ride?
I suspect you simply believed it counted as a business expense, as I'm sure Stevie (and, more to the point, her accountant) believed. :)

[strandinthewind]

And how do you figure that? If she weren't in the music business, she most likely wouldn't need a bodyguard (since no one would know who she is, and therefore she most likely wouldn't have to worry about stalkers, etc.)... so, to me, that's a business expense.



No one is saying she should.
You said you tried to claim your home office, too... does that mean you expected a free ride?
I suspect you simply believed it counted as a business expense, as I'm sure Stevie (and, more to the point, her accountant) believed. :)

To quote "Steel Magnolias" - "Spoken like a true smart ass" (heavy lilt required :cool:) AND - I love ya for it!!!!!!

[Gwillaker]

Okay, this is an interesting article (kudos to the site)

http://bla.fleetwoodmac.net/index.php?page=index_v2&id=203&c=11

Los Angeles Times, 11/5/1996, Stevie Nicks in Flap with IRS < Stevie Nicks < Main Page

Los Angeles Times, 11/5/1996, Stevie Nicks in Flap with IRS



Stevie Nicks in Flap With IRS
By James Bates, Times Staff Writer
Los Angeles Times November 5th 1996

Stevie Nicks has good reason not to stop thinking about tomorrow: a looming Internal Revenue Service tax dispute. The IRS is seeking $85,887 in additional taxes from the former Fleetwood Mac singer, saying she improperly took about $270,000 in business expense deductions for makeup, hair styling, clothes a home office and management fees, according to U.S. Tax Court papers reviewed by The Times.

Among the expenses in dispute: $43,291 for clothes worn during performances, expenditures a Nicks lawyer in court documents defends as necessary because "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".

The case highlights an often murky tax question in the entertainment business: What can artists and performers reasonably claim is necessary to maintain carefully cultivated images?

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".

Short adds, "When not performing, (Nicks') makeup and hair-styling needs are minimal" so she doesn't claim them as a business expense then.

The Nicks case stems from an audit of her 1991 tax return. It has recently come to light in public documents, the result of her decision to appeal the case last month to Tax Court in Alexandria, Va. The majority of such tax disputes are rarely made public because they are usually settled in the early stages.

Nicks, whose real name is Stephanie, was virtually unknown until she joined Fleetwood Mac in the mid-1970's just before the group's career rocketed. With such albums as Fleetwood Mac and Rumours, the band became one of the biggest-selling rock groups of all time, recording such hits as "Rhiannon," "Over My Head," "Dreams" and "Don't Stop," which became the anthem of President Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign.

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.

Nicks also disputes an IRS decision disallowing $50,160 in expenses to maintain a business office in her Arizona home. In the petition, Short argues that Nicks used the office to compose songs, talk with advisors and executives and conduct her business as a songwriter and performer.

Finally, Short argues that Nicks also must spend money on private security services because she can attract unwanted attention "which disturbs and interrupts her trade, both while working from her home and when traveling on business." Short declined to comment on the case beyond what he wrote in court papers. An IRS spokesman said the agency does not comment on pending cases.

Former Fleetwood Mac singer? Whats the name of that band she's been touring with lately? :rolleyes:

[strandinthewind]

Former Fleetwood Mac singer? Whats the name of that band she's been touring with lately? :rolleyes:

I think at that time, Stevie had left FM. THANK GOODNESS they got back together!!!!!!!! :woohoo:

[Gwillaker]

I think at that time, Stevie had left FM. THANK GOODNESS they got back together!!!!!!!! :woohoo:

Oh :o

And I agree. The world needs the Mac! :cool:

[GretaRhiannon]

"...I told her we couldn't, that Hillary was in the next room, but she put soft Jasmine-scented finger to my lips delicately and told me to quiet. Her golden hair billowed past her shoulders and her black skirt blew off to the side as a gust of warm air filled the room. I was mesmerized. Then she turned around slowly...undoing the laces...saying she had met her match..."

what the...LMAO!!! Ok, that was the funniest thing I've read all day...HAHAHA

[hayley]

BTW, back to the original topic-

I looked at the index at B&N last night, and there's no mention of the Mac. Surprising, considering the book is supposedly a 950 page + detail of every person Bill Clinton has ever met in his entire life.

[dissention]

And how do you figure that? If she weren't in the music business, she most likely wouldn't need a bodyguard (since no one would know who she is, and therefore she most likely wouldn't have to worry about stalkers, etc.)... so, to me, that's a business expense.

You have a point, but it still isn't a business expense. She doesn't need a bodyguard to conduct business, she needs it for safety, there's a difference. And obviously the IRS agrees with me. ;) If anything, it's a personal expense.

No one is saying she should.
You said you tried to claim your home office, too... does that mean you expected a free ride?
I suspect you simply believed it counted as a business expense, as I'm sure Stevie (and, more to the point, her accountant) believed. :)

I didn't expect a free ride, I thought I could claim it as a business expense because I'm not an aficionado when it comes to tax law. :wavey: My accountant set me straight on that before I even filed, so if Stevie employs an accountant who believed she could claim her home office as a business expense, she needs to inquire about the services of another accountant who knows what they're doing. ;)

As for the clothes that she claimed as business expenses, that's BS, too. Should I be able to deduct the cost of a hazmat suit when I have to purchase one for a job that I'm doing? Should I be able to claim the gas that I put in my car because I'd be prevented from doing business without it? The answers are no and an entertainer is no exception to the rule. We can argue over what her business expenses are and what not, but the IRS clearly defined what is and what isn't when it comes to her, resulting in a huge audit.

[dissention]

This of course is all narrated in Billy Connolly's agonisingly harsh Scottish accent.

Wait, do Americans even know who he is?

Oh never mind. You'd have to be an Australian to understand the joke anyway.

Proceed..........

Billy Connolly is hysterical. Too bad he makes ****ty movies. :laugh: He should stick to stand-up.

[strandinthewind]

Actually, a body guard is a legitimate business expense when she is on the road - there really is no question about that. It is a cost of her or any other star doing business and she clearly can prove she cannot do her business without it because she receives threats, people have killed themsleves outside of her concers, etc. I think they were talking about her deducting it from her personal income taxes for the time when she was not working, which correctly should not be a business expense. Again, it depends on how she sets up her business. She probably is some sort of corp.

BTW - the IRS Code allows a hazmat suit to be a legitimate business expense since it cannot be used in any other place, it is protective wear, etc.

For more fun filled facts in the Instructions for Schedules A and B booklet from the IRS - the hazmat allowance and other fun filled facts on un-reimbursed employee expenses are on p. A-5 :cool: Happy Reading :laugh:

Forms 2106 and 2106EZ also allows you deduct you car, gas, etc. that you use for work. You can even sometimes deduct gas and tolls used to go to to charity work.

BTW - here is some info. on a home office. It can be done, it just requires a lot of proof, as it should. If she had a studio and she recorded there, I think she had a good argument as long as her business did not also claim the deduction, etc. :shrug:

http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=108138,00.html

Disclaimer - always check with an accountant, which I am not, before filing your taxes because you may or may not qualify! :wavey:

[dissention]

Actually, a body guard is a legitimate business expense when she is on the road - there really is no question about that. It is a cost of her or any other star doing business and she clearly can prove she cannot do her business without it because she receives threats, people have killed themsleves outside of her concers, etc. I think they were talking about her deducting it from her personal income taxes for the time when she was not working, which correctly should not be a business expense. Again, it depends on how she sets up her business. She probably is some sort of corp.

BTW - the IRS Code allows a hazmat suit to be a legitimate business expense since it cannot be used in any other place, it is protective wear, etc.

Exactly, that's why she was audited! But she claimed more than just a bodyguard while she wasn't working, though.

And I was not able to deduct any hazmat suits on my taxes, FYI. ;)

[strandinthewind]

And I was not able to deduct any hazmat suits on my taxes, FYI. ;)

Really - I would have been aggressive about that because the current and, I think, past codes clearly allow it if you pay for it and your employer does not reimburse you. The 2003 Instructions for Schedules A & B (Form 1040) booklet, p. A-5, allows an unreimbursed business expense on line 20 of Scedule A for:

Safety equipment, small tools, and supplies needed for your job.

Uniforms required by your employer that are not suitable for ordinary wear.

Protective clothing required in your work, such as hard hats, safety shoes, and glasses.
_________________________________________________


Surely, an unreimbursed expense for a required hazmat suit falls within these criteria and is in line with these non-exhaustive examples :shrug:

But, the IRS will do what it will do no matter how wrong under its own rules it is :rolleyes: :laugh:

[gldstwmn]

This of course is all narrated in Billy Connolly's agonisingly harsh Scottish accent.

Wait, do Americans even know who he is?



I do! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[cliffdweller]

Billy Connolly is hysterical. Too bad he makes ****ty movies. :laugh: He should stick to stand-up.


:laugh:

Did you see him in The Last Samurai with Toothy Cruise? That movie blew.

[dissention]

Really - I would have been aggressive about that because the current and, I think, past codes clearly allow it if you pay for it and your employer does not reimburse you. The 2003 Instructions for Schedules A & B (Form 1040) booklet, p. A-5, allows an unreimbursed business expense on line 20 of Scedule A for:

Safety equipment, small tools, and supplies needed for your job.

Uniforms required by your employer that are not suitable for ordinary wear.

Protective clothing required in your work, such as hard hats, safety shoes, and glasses.

Nope, I wasn't able to claim them. Now I'm going to call my accountant and ask why because I can't remember. :laugh:

I should get thousands more than I usually do, then. :lol:

[dissention]

:laugh:

Did you see him in The Last Samurai with Toothy Cruise? That movie blew.

Every movie with Toothy Cruise blows, with the exception of Risky Business and Legend. He's the cinematic equivalent of wet crackers. ;)

[strandinthewind]

Nope, I wasn't able to claim them. Now I'm going to call my accountant and ask why because I can't remember. :laugh:

I should get thousands more than I usually do, then. :lol:

It could be you did not have enough to meet the percentage cut off point. In other words, your deductions have to a certain percentage of the AGI or you lose them. That happens to me every year. In other words, although my Bar memberships, etc., are deductable, I cannot take the deduction from my 1040 because I do not have enough of them. Oh the IRS!!!!!!!! :laugh:

[cliffdweller]

Every movie with Toothy Cruise blows, with the exception of Risky Business and Legend. He's the cinematic equivalent of wet crackers. ;)


:laugh: , wet crackers...brilliant!