PPRuNeUser0197

G'day All,

I'm looking at investing in some RM Williams boots to wear whilst at work. I've had a read of the ATO website in relation to Uniforms & Protective clothing but the website is quite vague on what is considered 'protective'.

Has anyone been queried and had any success in justifying the protectiveness that RM Williams boots have.

I just want to look like all the other cool pilots.

Cheers,
TB2D

Duck Pilot

Ask your company to provide them, some do.

Pearly White

There's a question on this subject on the ATO Community website at https://community.ato.gov.au/s/quest...1Am2/p00017721 which seems to imply that if those shoes afford the safety and protection required in your workplace, they would be claimable.

Perhaps if your CP wrote a letter confirming your selected footwear meets the criteria it would help.

PPRuNeUser0197

I can barely get the bugger to pay for my IPC every year, I'm unsure I'll have any success in him purchasing me some flashy RM Williams Boots.

Just trying to figure out if the letter would hold up. I understand some boots have 'non-slip' bottoms which you could argue help in the rain. As well as leather boots tend to not melt as quickly as a pleather boot might.

TB2D

Mk1Aviation

Just do it, better to ask forgiveness than permission I say!

601

My reason was that the pleather soles became slippery when exposed to aviation fuel.
I needed leather soled boots for that reason.

Icarus2001

The requirement is for “non sparking shoes”. Given that RMs are riding boots the sole is smooth, cannot really argue grip. Just claim them as work shoes only, 100%. No safety angle on boots like those.

Jimnhorace

I have claimed them in the past. No problem.
I now work for a company that provides RM’s as part of our uniform but I claim any maintenance on them. Re-heel, re-sole etc.

Pearly White

Yeah, no. RMs are available with a range of different soles. Obviously don't get the city slicker shiny leather soles. You need the truck (or 210) driver version. There's a few options, the rubber, Itshide and Vibram should work for you.

More details here: https://www.rmwilliams.com.au/footwe...tml?lang=en_AU

Capt Fathom

You can claim what you want. You won’t have to justify it until you get audited.

Flying Binghi

RM sells a nice comfy warm vest. Perfect for un-heated cabins..

MENELAUS

And the boots are ****.

C441

For you I'm sure, but I had 2 pairs of RMs that served the last 25 years of my career, worn every time I went to work and they were comfortable, durable (obviously) and ideal for me. The second pair will still be going strong when I won't need footwear any longer!

Traffic_Is_Er_Was

They are conventional shoes (with a reputation for durability?) You can't claim normal shoes you choose to wear to work. You would only be claiming them as "protective". It would be up to you to justify how they are protective if you got audited. You couldn't really claim them under anything else, unless your employer made those specifically compulsory. The ATO web site is pretty clear.

deja vu

Should be able to claim moleskin pants for positioning flights too. It was once the standard dress code for QF cockpit crew., oh, with the R. M. Williams checked shirts.

Cedrik

What about the RM Williams underpants? Specially designed for the gentleman pilot with smaller than average genitalia

Angle of Attack

For info I endured a Tax audit several years ago and they checked about 4 years of previous returns. One of those years included purchase of a pair of RM shoes with “Non slip soles” and there was no complaint from the ATO over that claim.

Mk1Aviation

However they did take issue with the cleaning kit

Climb150

What is it with the obsession with wearing things meant for farmers?

RM Williams is majority owned by an American company now anyway. 😁

Jetsbest

Wrong…. From Wikipedia…
It is currently owned by Tattarang, an investment company owned by mining magnate Andrew Forrest.