Tax Court rules on medical necessities

Since the 1990 enactment of Sec. 213(d)(9), which stipulates that expenses for cosmetic surgery are not deductible, the IRS has subjected medical expense deductions to increased scrutiny. Nonetheless, over the past decade the definition of deductible medical expenses has expanded to include breast r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Tax Adviser Vol. 41; no. 10; p. 698
Main Author Jones, Lynn Comer
Format Magazine Article Trade Publication Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York American Institute of CPA's 01.10.2010
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
Subjects
Breast implants
Case law
Congenital diseases
Cosmetic surgery
Disease
Endocrine therapy
Etiology
Expense deductions
Expert witness testimony
Gender identity
Gender reassignment surgery
Laws, regulations and rules
Licenses
Medical care, Cost of
Medical diagnosis
Medical expense deduction
Mental disorders
Physiology
Plastic surgery
Psychiatrists
Psychotherapy
Tax court decisions
Tax courts
Tax deductions
Taxation
Therapists
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Since the 1990 enactment of Sec. 213(d)(9), which stipulates that expenses for cosmetic surgery are not deductible, the IRS has subjected medical expense deductions to increased scrutiny. Nonetheless, over the past decade the definition of deductible medical expenses has expanded to include breast reconstruction subsequent to mastectomy (cancer); laser eye surgery (myopia); nonprescription medical supplies; and expenses for obtaining an egg donor (infertility treatment). In O'Donnabhain the Tax Court has expanded the list of deductible medical expenses to include hormone therapy and sex reassignment expenses for the treatment of gender identity disorder (GID). On her 2001 tax return, Rhiannon G. O'Donnabhain claimed itemized medical deductions for GID treatment. The IRS denied the deductions in January 2006 via a statutory notice of deficiency, and the taxpayer petitioned the Tax Court in March 2006. Nearly four years later, on February 2, 2010, the Tax Court ruled in favor of O'Donnabhain. The 90-day appeal period passed without an appeal by the IRS.
ISSN:0039-9957