Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Tax Court: Gender Reassignment Surgery Is a Deductible Medical Expense (But Not Breast Augmentation)
In a long-awaited decision, a fractured (8-5-3) Tax Court today ruled in O’Donnabhain v. Commissioner, 134 T.C. No. 4 (Feb. 2, 2010), that male-to-female gender reassignment surgery qualifies as a deductible medical expense under § 213, reversing the IRS's position in Chief Counsel Advice 200603025. The 8-judge majority held that:
- TP's gender identity disorder is a “disease” within the meaning of § 213(d)(1)(A) & (9)(B).
- TP's hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery were for the treatment of disease within the meaning of § 213(d)(1)(A) & (9)(B), and thus not “cosmetic surgery” excluded from the definition of deductible “medical care” by § 213(d)(9)(A).
- TP's breast augmentation surgery was directed at improving her appearance did not meaningfully promote the proper function of her body or treat disease within the meaning of § 213(d)(9)(B), and thus was “cosmetic surgery” excluded from the definition of deductible “medical care” by § 213(d)(9)(A).
Judge Gale wrote the 69-page majority opinion, joined by Judges Cohen, Colvin. Marvel, Morrison, Paris, Thornton, and Wherry. Judge Halperin (12 pages), Judge Holmes (joined by Judge Goeke) (23 pages), and Judge Goeke (joined by Judge Holmes) (6 pages) wrote separate concurring opinions. Judge Foley (joined by Judges Gustafson, Kroupa, Vasquez, and Wells) (8 pages) and Judge Gustafson (joined by Judges Foley, Kroupa, Vasquez, and Wells) (21 pages) wrote separate opinions concurring in part and dissenting in part.
Prior TaxProf Blog coverage:
- IRS Denies Medical Expense Deduction for Costs of Gender-Reassignment Surgery (Jan. 23, 2006)
- Tax Court to Decide Deductibility of Sex-Change Operation (July 18, 2007)
- IRS: Why Cost of Gender Reassignment Surgery Is Not a Deductible Medical Expense (Oct. 2, 2007)
- Tax Court to Decide Deductibility of Sex-Change Operation (Oct. 2, 2007)
- NPR on Deductibility of Sex-Change Operation (Oct. 17, 2007)
Update:
- ABC News
- Bloomberg
- Feminist Law Professors
- Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders Press Release
- LexisNexis Tax Law Center
- ProfessorBainbridge.com
- USA Today
- Web CPA
- Wikipedia
https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2010/02/tax-court-gender.html
Comments
I'm just amazed by this case (that would be because I'm Peruvian and I didn't know about it). That's juts one example on how Tax law (derecho tributario, in spanish) can build its own language. Here, we students seldom complain on how tax law has a different conceptual body different from other laws. Well, even in this case, medical issues can be set as legal issues, for deduction matters.
That's just a brief point of view from a a foreign blogger.
Thanks.
Posted by: Efrain Rodriguez | Feb 2, 2010 7:11:48 PM
Thanks so much for your ongoing thoughtful coverage of the O’Donnabhain case. Just to clarify the ruling on the breast augmentation: Judge Gale's majority opinion took pains to make clear that while the taxpayer's breast augmentation was not covered because of how her particular care providers discussed her breast development, doctrinally, other transgender tax payers may well be able to deduct those expenses, as well as those for other surgical procedures, so long as their care providers had documented that those procedures were connected to treating the clinical distress attendant to gender identity disorder.
Posted by: Karen Loewy | Feb 3, 2010 4:51:25 PM