BBC's Sian Williams in tax case

[AvadaKedavra]

www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2010/TC00397.html

She has asked for clothing and laundering and her hair-dos to be tax allowable expenses but been turned down - but look at #15, how funny would that be? Certainly boost Breakfast's viewing figures

My sympathies are with Sian - I can't believe she has to buy her own clothes. I'd assumed there would be a wardrobe department which supplied her with all those mumsy tasteful blouses. She can't wear the same things more than a couple of ties otherwise viewers complain- it must be very expensive and time consuming buying clothes all the time.

I bet her male co-presenter doesn't have this problem. I reckon he has 2 suits and fifty ties and nobody notices or cares what he wears. It's a tax on being female. Boo.

LOL this must be why Cambridge students have started doing Naked News.

Sian, if you ever read this, I have been allowed to claim for clothes and hair stuff etc in the past when on TV, although admittedly I am not on very much at all, unlike your good self.

To be honest I think she has a valid point.

If she looked like an unmade bed, there would be some that would complain, and in these days of any woman over 25 on telly having their days numbered, she has to make an effort, or she could find herself replaced.

I can't bear the creeping dress-down brigade that usually appear on telly, all this male no tie, frigging jumper stuff. I have the same problem with those that get on a plane looking a mess.

Its an occasion, either being on telly or getting on a plane, have some self respect and make an effort.

Hmmm. I started off by thinking that Sian williams was being outrageous, but then read in the link that she is not to wear the same clothes more than 2 times a month. So I am definitely more sympathetic. And agree about the tax on being female because men need a couple of suits and a bunch of ties.

Apropos, where I come from originally, anyone can claim a percentage of their clothing and dry cleaning costs for clothes they use for work. (plus travel costs etc). I was shocked when I first arrived here and realised you cannot claim for ANYTHING at all.

She was entirely badly advised to bring this case, IMO. The precedent of Mallalieu v Drummond is (a) binding and (b) completely clear.

Think she needs better advise than she has been given (in RL).