Disclaimer This edited version has been archived due to the length of time since original publication. It should not be regarded as indicative of the ATO's current views. The law may have changed since original publication, and views in the edited version may also be affected by subsequent precedents and new approaches to the application of the law. You cannot rely on this record in your tax affairs. It is not binding and provides you with no protection (including from any underpaid tax, penalty or interest). In addition, this record is not an authority for the purposes of establishing a reasonably arguable position for you to apply to your own circumstances. For more information on the status of edited versions of private advice and reasons we publish them, see PS LA 2008/4. |
Edited version of your written advice
Authorisation Number: 1051326074601
Date of advice: 11 January 2018
Ruling
Subject: Work related expenses
Question
Are you entitled to a deduction for dining out meal expenses related to your employment as a School Teacher?
Answer:
No.
This ruling applies for the following period
Year ended 30 June 20XX
The scheme commenced on
1 July 20XX
Relevant facts
You are a School Teacher.
You go and eat at restaurants to keep up with food trends
You take inspiration from trying different restaurants.
You incurred various expenses in relation to dining out and menu sampling. These costs consist of meals purchased at restaurants that you look to for inspiration in order to keep your knowledge up to date with new and current trends.
Relevant legislative provisions
Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 Section 8-1.
Reasons for decision
Section 8-1 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) allows a deduction for all losses and outgoings to the extent to which they are incurred in gaining or producing assessable income except where the outgoings are of a capital, private or domestic nature.
For expenses to be an allowable deduction under section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 there must be a sufficient connection between the outgoing and the activities directed at gaining or producing assessable income. The decision in Ronpibon Tin v. FCT (1949) 78 CLR 47; (1949) 8 ATD 431, confirms that for an outgoing to be deductible, a taxpayer has to establish that there is a nexus between the outgoing and the assessable income so that the outgoing is incidental and relevant to the gaining of the assessable income.
The essential character of the expenditure must be identified to determine whether it is in reality an outgoing incurred in gaining or producing assessable income. Where an expense is partly for income producing purposes and partly for private purposes, an apportionment of the expenses may be appropriate.
The Commissioner provides guidance on work-related deductions for Employee Teachers in Taxation Ruling TR 95/14. Further guidance is provided in Taxation Ruling TR 98/9. Whilst the ruling discusses self-education expenses the principles contained in it can be applied to your situation.
TR 98/9 explains that airfares, accommodation and meal expenses incurred on overseas study tours or sabbatical, on work-related conferences or seminars, or attending an educational institution are deductible if the necessary connection with a person’s income producing activity exists. However, if the subject of the self-education is too general in terms of the taxpayer’s income-earning activities, the necessary connection between the expense and the income earning activity does not exist.
In the Board of Review Case R47 84 ATC 380; (1984) 15 ATR 824, the taxpayer, a French language teacher, claimed a deduction for part of the expenses in travelling to France. The trip was not undertaken at the request of the taxpayer's employer. She asserted that the trip increased her teaching skills.
The Board of Review stated that the fact that the taxpayer became a better teacher because of the trip did not mean that expenses were incurred in the course of gaining her assessable income as a teacher. The expenditure was incurred in relation to a period during which the taxpayer was without obligation to render service to her employer.
In Cooper v FCT (1991) 29 FCR 177; 91 ATC 4396; (1991) 21 ATR 1616, a professional footballer was denied the cost of buying additional food and drink that his coach had instructed that he consume to maintain his weight during the football season. Justice Hill said:
Food and drink are ordinarily private matters, and the essential character of expenditure on food and drink will ordinarily be private rather than having the character of a working or business expense. The fact that the employee is required, as a term of employment, to incur a particular expenditure does not convert expenditure into a deductible outgoing.
In your case, while you may obtain ideas and knowledge while dining in restaurants the expenses are not necessarily incurred in earning your assessable income. The expenditure incurred has the character of a private expense. The connection is too general or remote to allow a deduction for any portion of the cost. The meals are considered to be a private matter.
Accordingly you are not entitled to a deduction for the expenses incurred for meals.