A list of MPs who have breast implants. Frankly I can’t understand why anyone does that, unless they are an exotic dancer or a Hooters waitress or perhaps a model, but to each their own. It’s probably useful for identifying Jane Does.
- Angela Abbrederis
- Autumn Star Cerenil-Lee
- Melissa Ann Clifton
- Rachel Lyn Conger
- Lois Marta Darnopuk
- Danielle Marie Day
- Lola Katherine Fry
- Muna Mahamud Haji
- Doris Edith Inzunza
- Theresa Darlene McCullen
- Michelle Loree Parker
- Stacy Ann Peterson
- Jami Sue Sherer
- Betty Fran Smith
I’m surprised this list is so short. I mean, there must be thousands of women on my site and only 14 have implants? Of course, that just the ones I know about; I’m sure there are others.
Here’s something for your guys to debate in the comments session: if a woman is in fact an exotic dancer, and she gets implants, do you think those should be tax-deductible as a business expense? It makes sense to me.
This was an actual court case. The IRS does not normally allow breast implants or other plastic surgery to be tax-deductible, unless it’s “medically necessary” to fix an actual deformity such a cleft palate. However, in 2014 an appeals court sided with an exotic dancer and allowed her to deduct her implants. Here’s the actual legal ruling that sided with the dancer. It was, however, a kind of special case: the dancer, named Cindy Hess but known by the stage name “Chesty Love”, got implants that made her breasts at first 56F, then 58N. (I didn’t know the sizes went up that high.) Per the first link:
[The judge] reasoned that for someone like Cynthia, top-heavy breasts are business assets and implants are a necessary “stage prop.” Hence, no personal benefit derived by Cynthia from those particular implants, which, Judge Pate pointedly noted, aren’t the type usually sought by women seeking to enhance their personal appearance. Instead, it was Cynthia’s financial desires that motivated the dancer to undergo the surgery.
Cynthia helped her case by testifying that because she and her husband routinely endured off-color, vituperative comments from people they encountered, she had decided to have the implants permanently removed when her exotic-dancing career ended. This bolstered her contention that the surgery was just for business purposes.
The judge compared the implants to work clothes and uniforms, which are allowable only if they satisfy a two-step test: (1) required as a condition of employment and (2) unsuitable for everyday use. It was a cinch for Cynthia to get over the first hurdle; her large, cumbersome breasts are a “costume,” needed to retain her employment as a professional exotic dancer.
As for the second stipulation, the court cited Cynthia’s testimony that she would remove the implants each day, were that possible. As they cause bacterial infections and other serious medical problems, her understandable preference would be not to “wear” them while offstage. The decision was that implants so extraordinarily large are “useful only in her business” and, therefore, deductible.
In other words, breast implants are still usually treated as non-deductible expenses, unless you have a job like Chesty Love’s and go really extreme, or, unless they’re medically necessary, like if you’ve had a mastectomy as a result of breast cancer.
The more you know!