This is not a spoof but it is liable to challenge. As an officer about £361.80 (male) is deducted from your gross pay as a uniform allowance. At 22% tax rate this is equivalent to about £79.60. Over 5 years this amounts to about £400.
Over a similar 5 year period the cost of replacing
all your number 2 uniforms through stores was exactly £400. You would need to do the sums today and claim tax relief on any increase since I did this comparison.
On this basis the tax relief takes no account of laundry, ironing, dry cleaning etc or indeed of replacement for No 1s, No 5, No 6s etc. So on that basis you can claim your actual costs.
The 6-year period mentioned above it, IIRC, the maximum that you can go back.
Is there a catch?
Yes, in the major's case there are two. If he pays tax at 40% then the annual relief is £144.72 or £65.12. HMRC may well claim he is already getting £65 quids worth of relief.
Then the major is undoubtedly wearing free-issue combat clothing now and indeed most of the time at home instead of barrack dress. True, this does need laundering but you will notice the symmetry of his claim for £140 and the actual amount already abated.
Anyway the £140 is the actual laundry cost and not the amount he would get from the tax man.
Now addressing the home based airman's case (officer). As free CS95 is not usually worn it follows that the uniform allowance will be swallowed up by simple replacement. Any maintenance costs would be on top.
Does it only cost £140 per year to maintain your kit?
If you go through the process - soap powder, electricity, water, ironing etc and then add in dry cleaning bills - don't forget the mess kit - shoe polish etc you will get far more than £140. Don't claim an agreed allowance claim what you believe are the actual costs.
Check my maths and go for it.
Mrs Wader, as a nurse, had an annual agreed allowance of £10. We challenged the RCN who came up with a c
p answer. I submitted a claim for about £140 (3 uniforms per week each worn once etc) and they paid the extra without even blinking. That £140 was 20 years ago!