According to Abba: The Official Photo Book, published to mark 40 years since they won Eurovision with Waterloo, the band’s style was influenced in part by laws that allowed the cost of outfits to be deducted against tax – so long as the costumes were so outrageous they could not possibly be worn on the street.

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    LOL wut?! Quote me chapter and verse please, actual law, case law or tax code.

    Y’all really believe anything anyone says as long as it conforms to your preexisting beliefs, don’t ya? Dunno, sounds like a rather conservative mindset to me.

      • Takumidesh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        2 months ago

        This article talks about how it’s ambiguous though and provides examples of things that are typically not normal clothing such as overalls and bibs not being deductible.

        It’s really not as clear cut as ‘uniform’ and it really boils down to a case by case basis except in the most obvious of cases.

        • NiHaDuncan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s moving the goal posts and completely irrelevant; of course it’s case-by-case when it comes to what constitutes a ‘uniform’, or else no clothes would be considered non-deductible as anything could be a part of a uniform.