...clients, don't you love them. I have one who supplies upvc windows and doors. He has put through a receipt for a gun costing over £400 and other gun related paraphanalia costing several hundred quid. He has written on the invoice for my purposes 'pest control'...we have rodents the size of elephants in Coventry!
It just did that to me too...mind most of my posts have been a tad flippant this morning.
I hadn't thought about that Michelle, I kind of wish I hadn't somewhat sarcastically suggested that unless he is on gun patrol throughout the night that I was not about to embarrass myself by allowing it....if you don't hear much from me next week I just want to say what a blast it's been (possibly literally)
Would he notice if you omitted it? What are the other costs like, are they heavy? Its always tricky when these sort of things come up.
I would be inclined to email him a warning about the costs possibly being disallowed. And then, if he still wanted to add them in, I'd just keep all the written evidence of the conversation, and put it through. I wouldn't like to, if I felt he was blagging, but, if he says that's what it is, its his funeral if HMRC later say "NO WAY MOFO"!
I would think hairdressing on the day of the event, and the gown are allowable. While I was employed, I was doing accounts for an actress, and she claimed make up, botox, hair, gym. All costs in keeping the "product" sell-able.
Georgie, the black ball gown would be tricky under Mallalieu v Drummond but should be ok if considered a 'stage costume' and I, like Michelle, would probably claim it if she assured you she didn't wear it other than for performances and so long as she knew it was a potential 'discussion point' were there to be an inspection!
-- Edited by RobH on Saturday 30th of August 2014 04:20:34 PM
I've been loving this thread, it's very funny. But, on a serious note, the woodwind musician has an "embouchure" to maintain, without which, she couldn't play properly. Dental treatment is very scary for these people as their career could be over if their teeth were ruined or even changed slightly, so they need to have a good dentist with understanding of it. Would this make it allowable? Here's a bit of quote from (very long article) on Wikipedia:
"The embouchure is an important element to tone production. The right embouchure, developed with "time, patience, and intelligent work",[18] will produce a beautiful sound and a correct intonation. The embouchure is produced with the muscles around the lips: principally the orbicularis oris muscle and the depressor anguli oris, whilst avoiding activiation of zygomaticus major, which will produce a smile, flattening the top lip against the maxillary (upper jaw) teeth."
I can understand your logic and if she was in America then I believe that it would be an allowable expense... However, in the UK it would only be allowable if she used her teeth wholly and exclusively for that purpose.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
I would say it allowable (albeit there may be discussions with HMRC if queried). It is the intent which is important for performers, and while there may a personal benefit in the appearance of the musician, the purpose of the dentistry is to maintain the ability to play a wind instrument, as Helen has said, to maintain an embouchure.
I was just thinking that I was maybe too soft as I would have leaned towards allowing this. Having seen the link, I'm standing by it. My reasoning is that many years ago, my brother, a brass player, travelled for miles and paid privately to have his teeth looked after privately by someone known as a "dentist to the musicians"
This was in an era when NHS still looked after dental health for most people. My brother felt he had to pay privately as this particular dentist would make sure that his teeth (and therefore his embouchure) didn't change - not one iota. He did not have cosmetically perfect teeth - far from it. But after honing his skills for many years, with his natural teeth, one little tiny dental change could mean that it would take months until being able to play perfectly again.
Don't fancy trying to win a debate with you Shaun (sorry Bill, I'll leave that to you ). It's just my opinion that dental work for some musicians is essential to their professional ability and is not for aesthetic reasons. Having said that, my brother lives in Florida now and he has finally learned to play with some nice new beautiful teeth.
Helen
-- Edited by HellsBells on Sunday 31st of August 2014 07:41:21 PM
). 
