Can the cost of a suit or blazer be considered a tax-deductible expense?

Whether during a client meeting, business presentation or training session – an entrepreneur should take care of their appearance. Neat, professional attire reflects not only on the individual but also on the company they represent. It is therefore unsurprising that taxpayers have been turning to the tax authorities for many years with applications for individual rulings on whether the costs of purchasing suits, blazers, shirts or trousers may be considered tax-deductible business expenses. Although the position of the National Revenue Information (KIS) has not been consistent on this issue, its most recent stance is far from encouraging.

Can a suit be a tax-deductible expense? A query to KIS

The applicant, an entrepreneur providing services related to identifying clients’ needs and requirements for software applications, submitted a request for an individual tax interpretation. He indicated that a significant part of his work involved conducting discussions and meetings with clients. According to the applicant, this cooperation required impeccable appearance, which affected how he was perceived and, consequently, the recognition of his business activity. He asked the Director of KIS whether the purchase of a suit – i.e. a blazer, waistcoat and trousers – and accessories such as shoes and a belt, could constitute a tax-deductible cost within the meaning of Article 22(1) of the Personal Income Tax Act. In his view, the purchase of a suit (blazer, waistcoat and trousers), a belt and shoes represented a business-related cost. These items would be used for client meetings and for promoting his business, and would therefore serve to safeguard and maintain his income source, fulfilling the conditions set out in Article 22(1).

However, in a letter dated 25 July 2022 (ref. 0112-KDIL2-2.4011.483.2022.1.AA), the Director of the National Revenue Information did not agree with this position, stating that expenses incurred for purchasing a suit – i.e. blazer, waistcoat, trousers – and accessories such as shoes and a belt, do not meet the criteria set out in Article 22(1) of the Personal Income Tax Act and thus cannot be classified as tax-deductible expenses.

Clothing is a personal matter, not a deductible cost

The authority concluded that clothing purchases are related to an individual’s functioning in society. Regardless of the type of business activity, everyone must purchase and wear clothing and footwear suited to their personal needs. Therefore, such purchases fulfil ordinary, everyday personal requirements. Exceptions to this may apply where a legal obligation requires specific attire or footwear to be used and where such items lose their personal character, for example by being adapted for specific professional roles. Even if the clothing is marked with company-related monograms or initials, this does not, according to the authority, deprive the clothing of its personal nature.

According to the tax authority, the ability to generate income is not dependent on the type of clothing worn (blazer, waistcoat, trousers, shirt, belt or shoes). Social norms dictate that anyone conducting business should maintain a neat appearance – just as is expected of those in other professions, such as teachers or public officials. Thus, the authority stated that income generation in business is not contingent upon specific clothing. Enhancing one’s image through appropriate clothing cannot justify treating these expenses as tax-deductible.

No direct link between the suit and income generation

The authority indicated that the purpose of incurring such clothing expenses is to meet professional dress standards. According to KIS, there are no specific dress standards for business activity, and it is not possible to assume that the expenditure was made solely for the purpose of earning business income. As such, the expenses are of a personal nature and intended to meet personal image-related needs, and thus cannot be recognised as tax-deductible business costs under Article 22(1) of the Personal Income Tax Act.

The tax authority supported its position by referencing case law from the Supreme Administrative Court, including the judgments of 17 October 2003 (ref. SA/Rz 2341/01), 27 September 2004 (ref. III SA 3430/03), 25 June 2003 (ref. I SA/Ka 1328/02), 15 September 1999 (ref. I SA/Wa 1261/98), and 10 September 1999 (ref. I SA/Lu 742/98).

Inconsistent interpretation of deductible expenses

As stated at the beginning, the tax authority’s interpretation regarding whether expenses for business attire may be deemed tax-deductible is not consistent. For instance, in an interpretation dated 18 September 2017 (ref. 0114-KDIP3-1.4011.235.2017.2.IF), the Director of KIS recognised that “expenses for the purchase of business attire permanently marked with the applicant’s company logo serve a promotional purpose, as they increase brand recognition on the market, which may affect revenue and are therefore causally linked to income generation and safeguarding the source of income.” However, in a later individual interpretation dated 25 September 2020 (ref. 0114-KDIP3-1.4011.540.2020.1.MK1), the Director of KIS held that “even if the said expenses met the criteria of Article 22(1) of the Personal Income Tax Act, given that their main purpose is to build the applicant’s image and presence, they should be considered representation expenses, and as such cannot be treated as tax-deductible.”

If you have doubts about whether clothing or other business expenses may qualify as tax-deductible, or if you wish to submit an application for an individual tax ruling, we invite you to use the services of our law firm.

Service: Tax law