It is important to keep fit for a variety of reasons, but very few of them are linked to income. Therefore, most people cannot deduct gym memberships from their taxes. There has been a lot of argument from taxpayers about keeping fit in order to reduce sickness and earn an income, as well as ‘the way I look is important to my job’.
It is generally not possible to deduct fitness expenses unless your job requires you to be extremely fit. Physical requirements and demands of your specific role must have a direct relationship to how you earn your income. A good example is firefighters. Firefighters or what the ATO calls “general duties firefighter” roles cannot claim fitness expenses as a deduction. However, firefighters in specialist search and rescue operations teams, for instance, who are continuously tested on their fitness and physical activity as part of their job, can claim fitness expenses.
In the same way, professional ballet dancers may be able to claim their fitness expenses. Despite needing to look a particular way, models are not required to perform physical exertion and training for their modelling job. Consequently, your ability to claim a deduction is determined by your job’s physical demands.
It was confirmed in a case recently that a prison dog handler could claim a deduction for his gym membership in a case before the administrative appeals tribunal (AAT). Two dogs were being trained and maintained by the dog handler in this case. Whenever an emergency arises, he must be available to assist. It was sometimes difficult for the handler to prepare for these emergencies since they didn’t occur very often. According to the AAT, the handler did the following:
- In order to control a large German shepherd on a lead, the handler was required to high a high level of physical fitness (including muscular strength);
- A high level of aerobic fitness (that is, the ability to control and direct his dog effectively in an emergency) was required;
- Additionally, he must be capable of physically restraining prisoners.
The AAT found that a superior level of fitness was implicitly demanded in this case, even though the employer did not specify a specific level of fitness. But the dog handler didn’t have it all his way. There was a denial of his claim for supplement expenses, gym clothing, and travel costs.
As always, every case is different, even if some commentators say gym membership claims have now opened up. For fitness expenses to be tax-deductible, a worker must be part of a specialized workforce. As with the dog handler in the AAT case, police officers cannot generally claim fitness expenses, even though they respond rapidly to emergencies and may have to subdue people. Expenses are unlikely to be claimable unless they are part of a specialist response unit that requires a high level of fitness.
Consequently, gym memberships will remain an investment of self-love, not a means of income.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
