home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <text id=89TT3298>
- <title>
- Dec. 18, 1989: A Cute Number For The Taxman
- </title>
- <history>
- TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1989
- Dec. 18, 1989 Money Laundering
- </history>
- <article>
- <source>Time Magazine</source>
- <hdr>
- NATION, Page 42
- A Cute Number For the Taxman
- </hdr><body>
- <p>The bill for Nancy Reagan's dresses may come from the IRS
- </p>
- <p> Nancy Reagan struggled in her memoirs to explain why some
- people had objected to her "borrowing" designer dresses while
- she was First Lady. "One reason may be that some women aren't
- all that crazy about a woman who wears a size 4, and who seems
- to have no trouble staying slim," Mrs. Reagan wrote. The IRS has
- a more plausible explanation that has nothing to do with weight
- envy: the clothes and jewelry -- over $1 million worth -- may
- be considered taxable income.
- </p>
- <p> As part of its required audit of the Reagans' taxes during
- their White House years, the IRS's Los Angeles field office is
- considering information provided by M. Chris Blazakis, former
- executive vice president for James Galanos, one of the
- designers who provided Mrs. Reagan dresses on a need-to-wear
- basis. Under the tax laws, a celebrity receives income for
- high-visibility use of a product in an amount equal to the value
- of that product. The defense that some of the dresses were
- loans, not gifts, or that they are no longer worth very much
- once they have been worn, may not impress the IRS. A gown, even
- one that doesn't suffer soup stains, may depreciate from a
- $20,000 price tag to off-the-rack in a single evening. But that
- is the point of haute couture. Its value derives mainly from its
- once-in-a-lifetime wearing. Los Angeles designer David Hayes,
- from whom Mrs. Reagan borrowed more than 60 outfits, says of
- those she returned, "Once something is worn," its value is
- "nothing."
- </p>
- <p> Questions about the First Lady's practice initially came up
- in 1982, and she responded by promising not to accept any more
- free outfits. But when TIME reported in 1988 that Mrs. Reagan
- had continued to borrow dresses for six more years, press
- secretary Elaine Crispen explained that she "set her own little
- rule, and she broke her own little rule."
- </p>
- <p> The expensive question for the Reagans now is whether she
- broke any of the IRS's little rules. Tax agents have looked at
- thousands of official White House photos to find out what the
- First Lady wore and when she wore it.
- </p>
-
- </body></article>
- </text>
-
-