§213 — Medical, dental, etc., expenses

270 citing cases

(a)Allowance of deduction

There shall be allowed as a deduction the expenses paid during the taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, for medical care of the taxpayer, his spouse, or a dependent (as defined in section 152, determined without regard to subsections (b)(1), (b)(2), and (d)(1)(B) thereof), to the extent that such expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income.

(b)Limitation with respect to medicine and drugs

An amount paid during the taxable year for medicine or a drug shall be taken into account under subsection (a) only if such medicine or drug is a prescribed drug or is insulin.

(c)Special rule for decedents
(1)Treatment of expenses paid after death

For purposes of subsection (a), expenses for the medical care of the taxpayer which are paid out of his estate during the 1-year period beginning with the day after the date of his death shall be treated as paid by the taxpayer at the time incurred.

(2)Limitation

Paragraph (1) shall not apply if the amount paid is allowable under section 2053 as a deduction in computing the taxable estate of the decedent, but this paragraph shall not apply if (within the time and in the manner and form prescribed by the Secretary) there is filed—

(A)

a statement that such amount has not been allowed as a deduction under section 2053, and

(B)

a waiver of the right to have such amount allowed at any time as a deduction under section 2053.

(d)Definitions

For purposes of this section—

(1)

The term “medical care” means amounts paid—

(A)

for the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body,

(B)

for transportation primarily for and essential to medical care referred to in subparagraph (A),

(C)

for qualified long-term care services (as defined in section 7702B(c)), or

(D)

for insurance (including amounts paid as premiums under part B of title XVIII of the Social Security Act, relating to supplementary medical insurance for the aged) covering medical care referred to in subparagraphs (A) and (B) or for any qualified long-term care insurance contract (as defined in section 7702B(b)).

In the case of a qualified long-term care insurance contract (as defined in section 7702B(b)), only eligible long-term care premiums (as defined in paragraph (10)) shall be taken into account under subparagraph (D).

(2)Amounts paid for certain lodging away from home treated as paid for medical care.—

Amounts paid for lodging (not lavish or extravagant under the circumstances) while away from home primarily for and essential to medical care referred to in paragraph (1)(A) shall be treated as amounts paid for medical care if—

(A)

the medical care referred to in paragraph (1)(A) is provided by a physician in a licensed hospital (or in a medical care facility which is related to, or the equivalent of, a licensed hospital), and

(B)

there is no significant element of personal pleasure, recreation, or vacation in the travel away from home.

The amount taken into account under the preceding sentence shall not exceed $50 for each night for each individual.

(3)Prescribed drug.—

The term “prescribed drug” means a drug or biological which requires a prescription of a physician for its use by an individual.

(4)Physician.—

The term “physician” has the meaning given to such term by section 1861(r) of the Social Security Act (

42 U.S.C. 1395x(r)

).

(5)Special rule in the case of child of divorced parents, etc.—

Any child to whom section 152(e) applies shall be treated as a dependent of both parents for purposes of this section.

(6)

In the case of an insurance contract under which amounts are payable for other than medical care referred to in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (1)—

(A)

no amount shall be treated as paid for insurance to which paragraph (1)(D) applies unless the charge for such insurance is either separately stated in the contract, or furnished to the policyholder by the insurance company in a separate statement,

(B)

the amount taken into account as the amount paid for such insurance shall not exceed such charge, and

(C)

no amount shall be treated as paid for such insurance if the amount specified in the contract (or furnished to the policyholder by the insurance company in a separate statement) as the charge for such insurance is unreasonably large in relation to the total charges under the contract.

(7)

Subject to the limitations of paragraph (6), premiums paid during the taxable year by a taxpayer before he attains the age of 65 for insurance covering medical care (within the meaning of subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of paragraph (1)) for the taxpayer, his spouse, or a dependent after the taxpayer attains the age of 65 shall be treated as expenses paid during the taxable year for insurance which constitutes medical care if premiums for such insurance are payable (on a level payment basis) under the contract for a period of 10 years or more or until the year in which the taxpayer attains the age of 65 (but in no case for a period of less than 5 years).

(8)

The determination of whether an individual is married at any time during the taxable year shall be made in accordance with the provisions of section 6013(d) (relating to determination of status as husband and wife).

(9)Cosmetic surgery.—
(A)In general.—

The term “medical care” does not include cosmetic surgery or other similar procedures, unless the surgery or procedure is necessary to ameliorate a deformity arising from, or directly related to, a congenital abnormality, a personal injury resulting from an accident or trauma, or disfiguring disease.

(B)Cosmetic surgery defined.—

For purposes of this paragraph, the term “cosmetic surgery” means any procedure which is directed at improving the patient’s appearance and does not meaningfully promote the proper function of the body or prevent or treat illness or disease.

(10)Eligible long-term care premiums.—
(A)In general.—

For purposes of this section, the term “eligible long-term care premiums” means the amount paid during a taxable year for any qualified long-term care insurance contract (as defined in section 7702B(b)) covering an individual, to the extent such amount does not exceed the limitation determined under the following table:

In the case of an individual with an  attained age before the close of the  taxable year of:The limitation is:
40 or less$  200
More than 40 but not more than 50375
More than 50 but not more than 60750
More than 60 but not more than 702,000
More than 702,500.
(B)Indexing.—
(i)In general.—

In the case of any taxable year beginning in a calendar year after 1997, each dollar amount contained in subparagraph (A) shall be increased by the medical care cost adjustment of such amount for such calendar year. If any increase determined under the preceding sentence is not a multiple of $10, such increase shall be rounded to the nearest multiple of $10.

(ii)Medical care cost adjustment.—

For purposes of clause (i), the medical care cost adjustment for any calendar year is the percentage (if any) by which—

(I)

the medical care component of the C-CPI-U (as defined in section 1(f)(6)) for August of the preceding calendar year, exceeds

(II)

such component of the CPI (as defined in section 1(f)(4)) for August of 1996, multiplied by the amount determined under section 1(f)(3)(B).

The Secretary shall, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, prescribe an adjustment which the Secretary determines is more appropriate for purposes of this paragraph than the adjustment described in the preceding sentence, and the adjustment so prescribed shall apply in lieu of the adjustment described in the preceding sentence.

(11)Certain payments to relatives treated as not paid for medical care.—

An amount paid for a qualified long-term care service (as defined in section 7702B(c)) provided to an individual shall be treated as not paid for medical care if such service is provided—

(A)

by the spouse of the individual or by a relative (directly or through a partnership, corporation, or other entity) unless the service is provided by a licensed professional with respect to such service, or

(B)

by a corporation or partnership which is related (within the meaning of section 267(b) or 707(b)) to the individual.

For purposes of this paragraph, the term “relative” means an individual bearing a relationship to the individual which is described in any of subparagraphs (A) through (G) of section 152(d)(2). This paragraph shall not apply for purposes of section 105(b) with respect to reimbursements through insurance.

(e)Exclusion of amounts allowed for care of certain dependents

Any expense allowed as a credit under section 21 shall not be treated as an expense paid for medical care.

  • Treas. Reg. §1.213-1Medical, dental, etc., expenses Show full text ▾ Collapse ▴

    (a) Allowance of deduction. (1) Section 213 permits a deduction of payments for certain medical expenses (including expenses for medicine and drugs). Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section (relating to special rule for decedents) a deduction is allowable only to individuals and only with respect to medical expenses actually paid during the taxable year, regardless of when the incident or event which occasioned the expenses occurred and regardless of the method of accounting employed by the taxpayer in making his income tax return. Thus, if the medical expenses are incurred but not paid during the taxable year, no deduction for such expenses shall be allowed for such year.

    (2) Except as provided in subparagraphs (4)(i) and (5)(i) of this paragraph, only such medical expenses (including the allowable expenses for medicine and drugs) are deductible as exceed 3 percent of the adjusted gross income for the taxable year. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1966, the amounts paid during the taxable year for insurance that constitute expenses paid for medical care shall, for purposes of computing total medical expenses, be reduced by the amount determined under subparagraph (5)(i) of this paragraph. For the amounts paid during the taxable year for medicine and drugs which may be taken into account in computing total medical expenses, see paragraph (b) of this section. For the maximum deduction allowable under section 213 in the case of certain taxable years, see paragraph (c) of this section. As to what constitutes “adjusted gross income”, see section 62 and the regulations thereunder.

    (3)(i) For medical expenses paid (including expenses paid for medicine and drugs) to be deductible, they must be for medical care of the taxpayer, his spouse, or a dependent of the taxpayer and not be compensated for by insurance or otherwise. Expenses paid for the medical care of a dependent, as defined in section 152 and the regulations thereunder, are deductible under this section even though the dependent has gross income equal to or in excess of the amount determined pursuant to § 1.151-2 applicable to the calendar year in which the taxable year of the taxpayer begins. Where such expenses are paid by two or more persons and the conditions of section 152(c) and the regulations thereunder are met, the medical expenses are deductible only by the person designated in the multiple support agreement filed by such persons and such deduction is limited to the amount of medical expenses paid by such person.

    (ii) An amount excluded from gross income under section 105 (c) or (d) (relating to amounts received under accident and health plans) and the regulations thereunder shall not constitute compensation for expenses paid for medical care. Exclusion of such amounts from gross income will not affect the treatment of expenses paid for medical care.

    (iii) The application of the rule allowing a deduction for medical expenses to the extent not compensated for by insurance or otherwise may be illustrated by the following example in which it is assumed that neither the taxpayer nor his wife has attained the age of 65:

    (4)(i) For taxable years beginning before January 1, 1967, where either the taxpayer or his spouse has attained the age of 65 before the close of the taxable year, the 3-percent limitation on the deduction for medical expenses does not apply with respect to expenses for medical care of the taxpayer or his spouse. Moreover, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1959, and before January 1, 1967, the 3-percent limitation on the deduction for medical expenses does not apply to amounts paid for the medical care of a dependent (as defined in sec. 152) who is the mother or father of the taxpayer or his spouse and who has attained the age of 65 before the close of the taxpayer's taxable year. For taxable years beginning before January 1, 1964, and for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1966, all amounts paid by the taxpayer for medicine and drugs are subject to the 1-percent limitation provided by section 213(b). For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1963, and before January 1, 1967, the 1-percent limitation provided by section 213(b) does not apply, under certain circumstances, to amounts paid by the taxpayer for medicine and drugs for the taxpayer and his spouse or for a dependent (as defined in sec. 152) who is the mother or father of the taxpayer or of his spouse. (For additional provisions relating to the 1-percent limitation with respect to medicine and drugs, see paragraph (b) of this section.) For taxable years beginning before January 1, 1967, whether or not the 3-percent or 1-percent limitation applies, the total medical expenses deductible under section 213 are subject to the limitations described in section 213(c) and paragraph (c) of this section and, where applicable, to the limitations described in section 213(g) and § 1.213-2.

    (ii) The age of a taxpayer shall be determined as of the last day of his taxable year. In the event of the taxpayer's death, his taxable year shall end as of the date of his death. The age of a taxpayer's spouse shall be determined as of the last day of the taxpayer's taxable year, except that, if the spouse dies within such taxable year, her age shall be determined as of the date of her death. Likewise, the age of the taxpayer's dependent who is the mother or father of the taxpayer or of his spouse shall be determined as of the last day of the taxpayer's taxable year but not later than the date of death of such dependent.

    (iii) The application of subdivision (i) of this subparagraph may be illustrated by the following examples:

    (5)(i) For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1966, there may be deducted without regard to the 3-percent limitation the lesser of—(a) One-half of the amounts paid during the taxable year for insurance which constitute expenses for medical care for the taxpayer, his spouse, and dependents; or (b) $150.

    (ii) The application of subdivision (i) of this subparagraph may be illustrated by the following example:

    (b) Limitation with respect to medicine and drugs—(1) Taxable years beginning before January 1, 1964. (i) Amounts paid during taxable years beginning before January 1, 1964, for medicine and drugs are to be taken into account in computing the allowable deduction for medical expenses paid during the taxable year only to the extent that the aggregate of such amounts exceeds 1 percent of the adjusted gross income for the taxable year. Thus, if the aggregate of the amounts paid for medicine and drugs exceeds 1 percent of adjusted gross income, the excess is added to other medical expenses for the purpose of computing the medical expense deduction. The application of this subdivision may be illustrated by the following example:

    (ii) For taxable years beginning before January 1, 1964, the 1-percent limitation is applicable to all amounts paid by a taxpayer during the taxable year for medicine and drugs. Moreover, this limitation applies regardless of the fact that the amounts paid are for medicine and drugs for the taxpayer, his spouse, or dependent parent (the mother or father of the taxpayer or of his spouse) who has attained the age of 65 before the close of the taxable year. In a case where either a taxpayer or his spouse has attained the age of 65 and the taxpayer pays an amount in excess of 1 percent of adjusted gross income for medicine and drugs for himself, his spouse, and his dependents, it is necessary to apportion the 1 percent of adjusted gross income (the portion which is not taken into account as expenses paid for medical care) between the taxpayer and his spouse on the one hand and his dependents on the other. The part of the 1 percent allocable to the taxpayer and his spouse is an amount which bears the same ratio to 1 percent of his adjusted gross income which the amount paid for medicine and drugs for the taxpayer and his spouse bears to the total amount paid for medicine and drugs for the taxpayer, his spouse, and his dependents. The balance of the 1 percent shall be allocated to his dependents. The amount paid for medicine and drugs in excess of the allocated part of the 1 percent shall be taken into account as payments for medical care for the taxpayer and his spouse on the one hand and his dependents on the other, respectively. A similar apportionment must be made in the case of a dependent parent (65 years of age or over) of the taxpayer or his spouse. The application of this subdivision (ii) may be illustrated by the following example:

    (2) Taxable years beginning after December 31, 1963. (i) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (ii) of this subparagraph, amounts paid during taxable years beginning after December 31, 1963, for medicine and drugs are to be taken into account in computing the allowable deduction for medical expenses paid during the taxable year only to the extent that the aggregate of such amounts exceeds 1 percent of the adjusted gross income for the taxable year. Thus, if the aggregate of the amounts paid for medicine and drugs which are subject to the 1-percent limitation exceeds 1 percent of adjusted gross income, the excess is added to other medical expenses for the purpose of computing the medical expense deduction.

    (ii) The 1-percent limitation provided by section 213 does not apply to amounts paid by a taxpayer during a taxable year beginning after December 31, 1963, and before January 1, 1967, for medicine and drugs for the medical care of the taxpayer and his spouse if either has attained the age of 65 before the close of the taxable year. Moreover, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1963, and before January 1, 1967, the 1-percent limitation with respect to medicine and drugs does not apply to amounts paid for the medical care of a dependent (as defined in sec. 152) who is the mother or father of the taxpayer or of his spouse and who has attained the age of 65 before the close of the taxpayer's taxable year. Amounts paid for medicine and drugs which are not subject to the limitation on medicine and drugs are added to other medical expenses of a taxpayer and his spouse or the dependent (as the case may be) for the purpose of computing the medical expense deduction.

    (iii) The application of this subparagraph may be illustrated by the following examples:

    (3) Definition of medicine and drugs. For definition of medicine and drugs, see paragraph (e) (2) of this section.

    (c) Maximum limitations. (1) For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1966, there shall be no maximum limitation on the amount of the deduction allowable for payment of medical expenses.

    (2) Except as provided in section 213(g) and § 1.213-2 (relating to maximum limitations with respect to certain aged and disabled individuals for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1967), for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1961, and before January 1, 1967, the maximum deduction allowable for medical expenses paid in any one taxable year is the lesser of:

    (i) $5,000 multiplied by the number of exemptions allowed under section 151 (exclusive of exemptions allowed under section 151(c) for a taxpayer or spouse attaining the age of 65, or section 151(d) for a taxpayer who is blind or a spouse who is blind);

    (ii) $10,000, if the taxpayer is single, not the head of a household (as defined in section 1(b) (2)) and not a surviving spouse (as defined in section 2(b)), or is married and files a separate return; or

    (iii) $20,000 if the taxpayer is married and files a joint return with his spouse under section 6013, or is the head of a household (as defined in section 1(b) (2)), or a surviving spouse (as defined in section 2(b)).

    (3) The application of subparagraph (2) of this paragraph may be illustrated by the following example:

    (4) Except as provided in section 213(g) and § 1.213-2 (relating to certain aged and disabled individuals), for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1962, the maximum deduction allowable for medical expenses paid in any 1 taxable year is the lesser of:

    (i) $2,500 multiplied by the number of exemptions allowed under section 151 (exclusive of exemptions allowed under section 151(c) for a taxpayer or spouse attaining the age of 65, or section 151(d) for a taxpayer who is blind or a spouse who is blind);

    (ii) $5,000, if the taxpayer is single, not the head of a household (as defined in section 1(b) (2)) and not a surviving spouse (as defined in section 2(b)) or is married and files a separate return; or

    (iii) $10,000, if the taxpayer is married and files a joint return with his spouse under section 6013, or is head of a household (as defined in section 1(b) (2)), or a surviving spouse (as defined in section 2(b)).

    (5) For the maximum deduction allowable for taxable years beginning before January 1, 1967, if the taxpayer or his spouse is age 65 or over and is disabled, see § 1.213-2.

    (d) Special rule for decedents. (1) For the purpose of section 213 (a), expenses for medical care of the taxpayer which are paid out of his estate during the 1-year period beginning with the day after the date of his death shall be treated as paid by the taxpayer at the time the medical services were rendered. However, no credit or refund of tax shall be allowed for any taxable year for which the statutory period for filing a claim has expired. See section 6511 and the regulations thereunder.

    (2) The rule prescribed in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph shall not apply where the amount so paid is allowable under section 2053 as a deduction in computing the taxable estate of the decedent unless there is filed in duplicate (i) a statement that such amount has not been allowed as a deduction under section 2053 in computing the taxable estate of the decedent and (ii) a waiver of the right to have such amount allowed at any time as a deduction under section 2053. The statement and waiver shall be filed with or for association with the return, amended return, or claim for credit or refund for the decedent for any taxable year for which such an amount is claimed as a deduction.

    (e) Definitions—(1) General. (i) The term medical care includes the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease. Expenses paid for “medical care” shall include those paid for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body or for transportation primarily for and essential to medical care. See subparagraph (4) of this paragraph for provisions relating to medical insurance.

    (ii) Amounts paid for operations or treatments affecting any portion of the body, including obstetrical expenses and expenses of therapy or X-ray treatments, are deemed to be for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body and are therefore paid for medical care. Amounts expended for illegal operations or treatments are not deductible. Deductions for expenditures for medical care allowable under section 213 will be confined strictly to expenses incurred primarily for the prevention or alleviation of a physical or mental defect or illness. Thus, payments for the following are payments for medical care: hospital services, nursing services (including nurses' board where paid by the taxpayer), medical, laboratory, surgical, dental and other diagnostic and healing services, X-rays, medicine and drugs (as defined in subparagraph (2) of this paragraph, subject to the 1-percent limitation in paragraph (b) of this section), artificial teeth or limbs, and ambulance hire. However, an expenditure which is merely beneficial to the general health of an individual, such as an expenditure for a vacation, is not an expenditure for medical care.

    (iii) Capital expenditures are generally not deductible for Federal income tax purposes. See section 263 and the regulations thereunder. However, an expenditure which otherwise qualifies as a medical expense under section 213 shall not be disqualified merely because it is a capital expenditure. For purposes of section 213 and this paragraph, a capital expenditure made by the taxpayer may qualify as a medical expense, if it has as its primary purpose the medical care (as defined in subdivisions (i) and (ii) of this subparagraph) of the taxpayer, his spouse, or his dependent. Thus, a capital expenditure which is related only to the sick person and is not related to permanent improvement or betterment of property, if it otherwise qualifies as an expenditure for medical care, shall be deductible; for example, an expenditure for eye glasses, a seeing eye dog, artificial teeth and limbs, a wheel chair, crutches, an inclinator or an air conditioner which is detachable from the property and purchased only for the use of a sick person, etc. Moreover, a capital expenditure for permanent improvement or betterment of property which would not ordinarily be for the purpose of medical care (within the meaning of this paragraph) may, nevertheless, qualify as a medical expense to the extent that the expenditure exceeds the increase in the value of the related property, if the particular expenditure is related directly to medical care. Such a situation could arise, for example, where a taxpayer is advised by a physician to install an elevator in his residence so that the taxpayer's wife who is afflicted with heart disease will not be required to climb stairs. If the cost of installing the elevator is $1,000 and the increase in the value of the residence is determined to be only $700, the difference of $300, which is the amount in excess of the value enhancement, is deductible as a medical expense. If, however, by reason of this expenditure, it is determined that the value of the residence has not been increased, the entire cost of installing the elevator would qualify as a medical expense. Expenditures made for the operation or maintenance of a capital asset are likewise deductible medical expenses if they have as their primary purpose the medical care (as defined in subdivisions (i) and (ii) of this subparagraph) of the taxpayer, his spouse, or his dependent. Normally, if a capital expenditure qualifies as a medical expense, expenditures for the operation or maintenance of the capital asset would also qualify provided that the medical reason for the capital expenditure still exists. The entire amount of such operation and maintenance expenditures qualifies, even if none or only a portion of the original cost of the capital asset itself qualified.

    (iv) Expenses paid for transportation primarily for and essential to the rendition of the medical care are expenses paid for medical care. However, an amount allowable as a deduction for “transportation primarily for and essential to medical care” shall not include the cost of any meals and lodging while away from home receiving medical treatment. For example, if a doctor prescribes that a taxpayer go to a warm climate in order to alleviate a specific chronic ailment, the cost of meals and lodging while there would not be deductible. On the other hand, if the travel is undertaken merely for the general improvement of a taxpayer's health, neither the cost of transportation nor the cost of meals and lodging would be deductible. If a doctor prescribes an operation or other medical care, and the taxpayer chooses for purely personal considerations to travel to another locality (such as a resort area) for the operation or the other medical care, neither the cost of transportation nor the cost of meals and lodging (except where paid as part of a hospital bill) is deductible.

    (v) The cost of in-patient hospital care (including the cost of meals and lodging therein) is an expenditure for medical care. The extent to which expenses for care in an institution other than a hospital shall constitute medical care is primarily a question of fact which depends upon the condition of the individual and the nature of the services he receives (rather than the nature of the institution). A private establishment which is regularly engaged in providing the types of care or services outlined in this subdivision shall be considered an institution for purposes of the rules provided herein. In general, the following rules will be applied:

    (a) Where an individual is in an institution because his condition is such that the availability of medical care (as defined in subdivisions (i) and (ii) of this subparagraph) in such institution is a principal reason for his presence there, and meals and lodging are furnished as a necessary incident to such care, the entire cost of medical care and meals and lodging at the institution, which are furnished while the individual requires continual medical care, shall constitute an expense for medical care. For example, medical care includes the entire cost of institutional care for a person who is mentally ill and unsafe when left alone. While ordinary education is not medical care, the cost of medical care includes the cost of attending a special school for a mentally or physically handicapped individual, if his condition is such that the resources of the institution for alleviating such mental or physical handicap are a principal reason for his presence there. In such a case, the cost of attending such a special school will include the cost of meals and lodging, if supplied, and the cost of ordinary education furnished which is incidental to the special services furnished by the school. Thus, the cost of medical care includes the cost of attending a special school designed to compensate for or overcome a physical handicap, in order to qualify the individual for future normal education or for normal living, such as a school for the teaching of braille or lip reading. Similarly, the cost of care and supervision, or of treatment and training, of a mentally retarded or physically handicapped individual at an institution is within the meaning of the term medical care.

    (b) Where an individual is in an institution, and his condition is such that the availability of medical care in such institution is not a principal reason for his presence there, only that part of the cost of care in the institution as is attributable to medical care (as defined in subdivisions (i) and (ii) of this subparagraph) shall be considered as a cost of medical care; meals and lodging at the institution in such a case are not considered a cost of medical care for purposes of this section. For example, an individual is in a home for the aged for personal or family considerations and not because he requires medical or nursing attention. In such case, medical care consists only of that part of the cost for care in the home which is attributable to medical care or nursing attention furnished to him; his meals and lodging at the home are not considered a cost of medical care.

    (c) It is immaterial for purposes of this subdivision whether the medical care is furnished in a Federal or State institution or in a private institution.

    (vi) See section 262 and the regulations thereunder for disallowance of deduction for personal living, and family expenses not falling within the definition of medical care.

    (2) Medicine and drugs. The term medicine and drugs shall include only items which are legally procured and which are generally accepted as falling within the category of medicine and drugs (whether or not requiring a prescription). Such term shall not include toiletries or similar preparations (such as toothpaste, shaving lotion, shaving cream, etc.) nor shall it include cosmetics (such as face creams, deodorants, hand lotions, etc., or any similar preparation used for ordinary cosmetic purposes) or sundry items. Amounts expended for items which, under this subparagraph, are excluded from the term medicine and drugs shall not constitute amounts expended for “medical care”.

    (3) Status as spouse or dependent. In the case of medical expenses for the care of a person who is the taxpayer's spouse or dependent, the deduction under section 213 is allowable if the status of such person as “spouse” or “dependent” of the taxpayer exists either at the time the medical services were rendered or at the time the expenses were paid. In determining whether such status as “spouse” exists, a taxpayer who is legally separated from his spouse under a decree of separate maintenance is not considered as married. Thus, payments made in June 1956 by A, for medical services rendered in 1955 to B, his wife, may be deducted by A for 1956 even though, before the payments were made, B may have died or in 1956 secured a divorce. Payments made in July 1956 by C, for medical services rendered to D in 1955 may be deducted by C for 1956 even though C and D were not married until June 1956.

    (4) Medical insurance. (i)(a) For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1966, expenditures for insurance shall constitute expenses paid for medical care only to the extent that such amounts are paid for insurance covering expenses of medical care referred to in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph. In the case of an insurance contract under which amounts are payable for other than medical care (as, for example, a policy providing an indemnity for loss of income or for loss of life, limb, or sight):

    (1) No amount shall be treated as paid for insurance covering expenses of medical care referred to in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph unless the charge for such insurance is either separately stated in the contract or furnished to the policyholder by the insurer in a separate statement,

    (2) The amount taken into account as the amount paid for such medical insurance shall not exceed such charge, and

    (3) No amount shall be treated as paid for such medical insurance if the amount specified in the contract (or furnished to the policyholder by the insurer in a separate statement) as the charge for such insurance is unreasonably large in relation to the total charges under the contract.

    For purposes of the preceding sentence, amounts will be considered payable for other than medical care under the contract if the contract provides for the waiver of premiums upon the occurrence of an event. In determining whether a separately stated charge for insurance covering expenses of medical care is unreasonably large in relation to the total premium, the relationship of the coverages under the contract together with all of the facts and circumstances shall be considered. In determining whether a contract constitutes an “insurance” contract it is irrelevant whether the benefits are payable in cash or in services. For example, amounts paid for hospitalization insurance, for membership in an association furnishing cooperative or so-called free-choice medical service, or for group hospitalization and clinical care are expenses paid for medical care. Premiums paid under Part B, title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395j-1395w), relating to supplementary medical insurance benefits for the aged, are amounts paid for insurance covering expenses of medical care. Taxes imposed by any governmental unit do not, however, constitute amounts paid for such medical insurance.

    (b) For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1966, subject to the rules of (a) of this subdivision, premiums paid during a taxable year by a taxpayer under the age of 65 for insurance covering expenses of medical care for the taxpayer, his spouse, or a dependent after the taxpayer attains the age of 65 are to be treated as expenses paid during the taxable year for insurance covering expenses of medical care if the premiums for such insurance are payable (on a level payment basis) under the contract:

    (1) For a period of 10 years or more, or

    (2) Until the year in which the taxpayer attains the age of 65 (but in no case for a period of less than 5 years).

    For purposes of this subdivision (b), premiums will be considered payable on a level payment basis if the total premium under the contract is payable in equal annual or more frequent installments. Thus, a total premium of $10,000 payable over a period of 10 years at $1,000 a year shall be considered payable on a level payment basis.

    (ii) For taxable years beginning before January 1, 1967, expenses paid for medical care shall include amounts paid for accident or health insurance. In determining whether a contract constitutes an “insurance” contract it is irrelevant whether the benefits are payable in cash or in services. For example, amounts paid for hospitalization insurance, for membership in an association furnishing cooperative or so-called free-choice medical service, or for group hospitalization and clinical care are expenses paid for medical care.

    (f) Exclusion of amounts allowed for care of certain dependents. Amounts taken into account under section 44A in computing a credit for the care of certain dependents shall not be treated as expenses paid for medical care.

    (g) Reimbursement for expenses paid in prior years. (1) Where reimbursement, from insurance or otherwise, for medical expenses is received in a taxable year subsequent to a year in which a deduction was claimed on account of such expenses, the reimbursement must be included in gross income in such subsequent year to the extent attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 for any prior taxable year. See section 104, relating to compensation for injuries or sickness, and section 105(b), relating to amounts expended for medical care, and the regulations thereunder, with regard to amounts in excess of or not attributable to deductions allowed.

    (2) If no medical expense deduction was taken in an earlier year, for example, if the standard deduction under section 141 was taken for the earlier year, the reimbursement received in the taxable year for the medical expense of the earlier year is not includible in gross income.

    (3) In order to allow the same aggregate medical expense deductions as if the reimbursement received in a subsequent year or years had been received in the year in which the payments for medical care were made, the following rules shall be followed:

    (i) If the amount of the reimbursement is equal to or less than the amount which was deducted in a prior year, the entire amount of the reimbursement shall be considered attributable to the deduction taken in such prior year (and hence includible in gross income); or

    (ii) If the amount of the reimbursement received in such subsequent year or years is greater than the amount which was deducted for the prior year, that portion of the reimbursement received which is equal in amount to the deduction taken in the prior year shall be considered as attributable to such deduction (and hence includible in gross income); but

    (iii) If the deduction for the prior year would have been greater but for the limitations on the maximum amount of such deduction provided by section 213 (c), then the amount of the reimbursement attributable to such deduction (and hence includible in gross income) shall be the amount of the reimbursement received in a subsequent year or years reduced by the amount disallowed as a deduction because of the maximum limitation, but not in excess of the deduction allowed for the previous year.

    (4) The application of subparagraphs (1), (2), and (3) of this paragraph may be illustrated by the following examples. Examples 1 and 2 reflect the maximum limitation on the medical expense deduction applicable to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1961. Examples 3 and 4 reflect the maximum limitation on the medical expense deduction applicable to taxable years beginning prior to January 1, 1962. For explanation of such maximum medical expense limitations, see paragraph (c) of this section.

    (h) Substantiation of deductions. In connection with claims for deductions under section 213, the taxpayer shall furnish the name and address of each person to whom payment for medical expenses was made and the amount and date of the payment thereof in each case. If payment was made in kind, such fact shall be so reflected. Claims for deductions must be substantiated, when requested by the district director, by a statement or itemized invoice from the individual or entity to which payment for medical expenses was made showing the nature of the service rendered, and to or for whom rendered; the nature of any other item of expense and for whom incurred and for what specific purpose, the amount paid therefor and the date of the payment thereof; and by such other information as the district director may deem necessary.

  • Treas. Reg. §1.213-1(a)Where an individual is in an institution because his condition is such that the availability of medical care (as defined in subdivisions (i) and (ii) of this subparagraph) in such institution is a principal reason for his presence there, and meals and lodging are furnished as a necessary incident to such care, the entire cost of medical care and meals and lodging at the institution, which are furnished while the individual requires continual medical care, shall constitute an expense for medical Show full text ▾ Collapse ▴

    Where an individual is in an institution because his condition is such that the availability of medical care (as defined in subdivisions (i) and (ii) of this subparagraph) in such institution is a principal reason for his presence there, and meals and lodging are furnished as a necessary incident to such care, the entire cost of medical care and meals and lodging at the institution, which are furnished while the individual requires continual medical care, shall constitute an expense for medical care. For example, medical care includes the entire cost of institutional care for a person who is mentally ill and unsafe when left alone. While ordinary education is not medical care, the cost of medical care includes the cost of attending a special school for a mentally or physically handicapped individual, if his condition is such that the resources of the institution for alleviating such mental or physical handicap are a principal reason for his presence there. In such a case, the cost of attending such a special school will include the cost of meals and lodging, if supplied, and the cost of ordinary education furnished which is incidental to the special services furnished by the school. Thus, the cost of medical care includes the cost of attending a special school designed to compensate for or overcome a physical handicap, in order to qualify the individual for future normal education or for normal living, such as a school for the teaching of braille or lip reading. Similarly, the cost of care and supervision, or of treatment and training, of a mentally retarded or physically handicapped individual at an institution is within the meaning of the term medical care.

  • Treas. Reg. §1.213-1(b)§1.213-1(b) Show full text ▾ Collapse ▴

    For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1966, subject to the rules of (a) of this subdivision, premiums paid during a taxable year by a taxpayer under the age of 65 for insurance covering expenses of medical care for the taxpayer, his spouse, or a dependent after the taxpayer attains the age of 65 are to be treated as expenses paid during the taxable year for insurance covering expenses of medical care if the premiums for such insurance are payable (on a level payment basis) under the contract:

    (1) For a period of 10 years or more, or

    (2) Until the year in which the taxpayer attains the age of 65 (but in no case for a period of less than 5 years).

    For purposes of this subdivision (b), premiums will be considered payable on a level payment basis if the total premium under the contract is payable in equal annual or more frequent installments. Thus, a total premium of $10,000 payable over a period of 10 years at $1,000 a year shall be considered payable on a level payment basis.

    (ii) For taxable years beginning before January 1, 1967, expenses paid for medical care shall include amounts paid for accident or health insurance. In determining whether a contract constitutes an “insurance” contract it is irrelevant whether the benefits are payable in cash or in services. For example, amounts paid for hospitalization insurance, for membership in an association furnishing cooperative or so-called free-choice medical service, or for group hospitalization and clinical care are expenses paid for medical care.

  • Treas. Reg. §1.213-1(c)It is immaterial for purposes of this subdivision whether the medical care is furnished in a Federal or State institution or in a private institution. Show full text ▾ Collapse ▴

    It is immaterial for purposes of this subdivision whether the medical care is furnished in a Federal or State institution or in a private institution.

    (vi) See section 262 and the regulations thereunder for disallowance of deduction for personal living, and family expenses not falling within the definition of medical care.

    (2) Medicine and drugs. The term medicine and drugs shall include only items which are legally procured and which are generally accepted as falling within the category of medicine and drugs (whether or not requiring a prescription). Such term shall not include toiletries or similar preparations (such as toothpaste, shaving lotion, shaving cream, etc.) nor shall it include cosmetics (such as face creams, deodorants, hand lotions, etc., or any similar preparation used for ordinary cosmetic purposes) or sundry items. Amounts expended for items which, under this subparagraph, are excluded from the term medicine and drugs shall not constitute amounts expended for “medical care”.

    (3) Status as spouse or dependent. In the case of medical expenses for the care of a person who is the taxpayer's spouse or dependent, the deduction under section 213 is allowable if the status of such person as “spouse” or “dependent” of the taxpayer exists either at the time the medical services were rendered or at the time the expenses were paid. In determining whether such status as “spouse” exists, a taxpayer who is legally separated from his spouse under a decree of separate maintenance is not considered as married. Thus, payments made in June 1956 by A, for medical services rendered in 1955 to B, his wife, may be deducted by A for 1956 even though, before the payments were made, B may have died or in 1956 secured a divorce. Payments made in July 1956 by C, for medical services rendered to D in 1955 may be deducted by C for 1956 even though C and D were not married until June 1956.

    (4) Medical insurance. (i)(a) For taxable years beginning after December 31, 1966, expenditures for insurance shall constitute expenses paid for medical care only to the extent that such amounts are paid for insurance covering expenses of medical care referred to in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph. In the case of an insurance contract under which amounts are payable for other than medical care (as, for example, a policy providing an indemnity for loss of income or for loss of life, limb, or sight):

    (1) No amount shall be treated as paid for insurance covering expenses of medical care referred to in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph unless the charge for such insurance is either separately stated in the contract or furnished to the policyholder by the insurer in a separate statement,

    (2) The amount taken into account as the amount paid for such medical insurance shall not exceed such charge, and

    (3) No amount shall be treated as paid for such medical insurance if the amount specified in the contract (or furnished to the policyholder by the insurer in a separate statement) as the charge for such insurance is unreasonably large in relation to the total charges under the contract.

    For purposes of the preceding sentence, amounts will be considered payable for other than medical care under the contract if the contract provides for the waiver of premiums upon the occurrence of an event. In determining whether a separately stated charge for insurance covering expenses of medical care is unreasonably large in relation to the total premium, the relationship of the coverages under the contract together with all of the facts and circumstances shall be considered. In determining whether a contract constitutes an “insurance” contract it is irrelevant whether the benefits are payable in cash or in services. For example, amounts paid for hospitalization insurance, for membership in an association furnishing cooperative or so-called free-choice medical service, or for group hospitalization and clinical care are expenses paid for medical care. Premiums paid under Part B, title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395j-1395w), relating to supplementary medical insurance benefits for the aged, are amounts paid for insurance covering expenses of medical care. Taxes imposed by any governmental unit do not, however, constitute amounts paid for such medical insurance.

  • Treas. Reg. §1.213-1(d)Special rule for decedents. Show full text ▾ Collapse ▴

    Special rule for decedents. (1) For the purpose of section 213 (a), expenses for medical care of the taxpayer which are paid out of his estate during the 1-year period beginning with the day after the date of his death shall be treated as paid by the taxpayer at the time the medical services were rendered. However, no credit or refund of tax shall be allowed for any taxable year for which the statutory period for filing a claim has expired. See section 6511 and the regulations thereunder.

    (2) The rule prescribed in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph shall not apply where the amount so paid is allowable under section 2053 as a deduction in computing the taxable estate of the decedent unless there is filed in duplicate (i) a statement that such amount has not been allowed as a deduction under section 2053 in computing the taxable estate of the decedent and (ii) a waiver of the right to have such amount allowed at any time as a deduction under section 2053. The statement and waiver shall be filed with or for association with the return, amended return, or claim for credit or refund for the decedent for any taxable year for which such an amount is claimed as a deduction.

  • Treas. Reg. §1.213-1(e)Definitions—(1) General. Show full text ▾ Collapse ▴

    Definitions—(1) General. (i) The term medical care includes the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease. Expenses paid for “medical care” shall include those paid for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body or for transportation primarily for and essential to medical care. See subparagraph (4) of this paragraph for provisions relating to medical insurance.

    (ii) Amounts paid for operations or treatments affecting any portion of the body, including obstetrical expenses and expenses of therapy or X-ray treatments, are deemed to be for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body and are therefore paid for medical care. Amounts expended for illegal operations or treatments are not deductible. Deductions for expenditures for medical care allowable under section 213 will be confined strictly to expenses incurred primarily for the prevention or alleviation of a physical or mental defect or illness. Thus, payments for the following are payments for medical care: hospital services, nursing services (including nurses' board where paid by the taxpayer), medical, laboratory, surgical, dental and other diagnostic and healing services, X-rays, medicine and drugs (as defined in subparagraph (2) of this paragraph, subject to the 1-percent limitation in paragraph (b) of this section), artificial teeth or limbs, and ambulance hire. However, an expenditure which is merely beneficial to the general health of an individual, such as an expenditure for a vacation, is not an expenditure for medical care.

    (iii) Capital expenditures are generally not deductible for Federal income tax purposes. See section 263 and the regulations thereunder. However, an expenditure which otherwise qualifies as a medical expense under section 213 shall not be disqualified merely because it is a capital expenditure. For purposes of section 213 and this paragraph, a capital expenditure made by the taxpayer may qualify as a medical expense, if it has as its primary purpose the medical care (as defined in subdivisions (i) and (ii) of this subparagraph) of the taxpayer, his spouse, or his dependent. Thus, a capital expenditure which is related only to the sick person and is not related to permanent improvement or betterment of property, if it otherwise qualifies as an expenditure for medical care, shall be deductible; for example, an expenditure for eye glasses, a seeing eye dog, artificial teeth and limbs, a wheel chair, crutches, an inclinator or an air conditioner which is detachable from the property and purchased only for the use of a sick person, etc. Moreover, a capital expenditure for permanent improvement or betterment of property which would not ordinarily be for the purpose of medical care (within the meaning of this paragraph) may, nevertheless, qualify as a medical expense to the extent that the expenditure exceeds the increase in the value of the related property, if the particular expenditure is related directly to medical care. Such a situation could arise, for example, where a taxpayer is advised by a physician to install an elevator in his residence so that the taxpayer's wife who is afflicted with heart disease will not be required to climb stairs. If the cost of installing the elevator is $1,000 and the increase in the value of the residence is determined to be only $700, the difference of $300, which is the amount in excess of the value enhancement, is deductible as a medical expense. If, however, by reason of this expenditure, it is determined that the value of the residence has not been increased, the entire cost of installing the elevator would qualify as a medical expense. Expenditures made for the operation or maintenance of a capital asset are likewise deductible medical expenses if they have as their primary purpose the medical care (as defined in subdivisions (i) and (ii) of this subparagraph) of the taxpayer, his spouse, or his dependent. Normally, if a capital expenditure qualifies as a medical expense, expenditures for the operation or maintenance of the capital asset would also qualify provided that the medical reason for the capital expenditure still exists. The entire amount of such operation and maintenance expenditures qualifies, even if none or only a portion of the original cost of the capital asset itself qualified.

    (iv) Expenses paid for transportation primarily for and essential to the rendition of the medical care are expenses paid for medical care. However, an amount allowable as a deduction for “transportation primarily for and essential to medical care” shall not include the cost of any meals and lodging while away from home receiving medical treatment. For example, if a doctor prescribes that a taxpayer go to a warm climate in order to alleviate a specific chronic ailment, the cost of meals and lodging while there would not be deductible. On the other hand, if the travel is undertaken merely for the general improvement of a taxpayer's health, neither the cost of transportation nor the cost of meals and lodging would be deductible. If a doctor prescribes an operation or other medical care, and the taxpayer chooses for purely personal considerations to travel to another locality (such as a resort area) for the operation or the other medical care, neither the cost of transportation nor the cost of meals and lodging (except where paid as part of a hospital bill) is deductible.

  • Treas. Reg. §1.213-1(f)Exclusion of amounts allowed for care of certain dependents. Show full text ▾ Collapse ▴

    Exclusion of amounts allowed for care of certain dependents. Amounts taken into account under section 44A in computing a credit for the care of certain dependents shall not be treated as expenses paid for medical care.

  • Treas. Reg. §1.213-1(g)Reimbursement for expenses paid in prior years. Show full text ▾ Collapse ▴

    Reimbursement for expenses paid in prior years. (1) Where reimbursement, from insurance or otherwise, for medical expenses is received in a taxable year subsequent to a year in which a deduction was claimed on account of such expenses, the reimbursement must be included in gross income in such subsequent year to the extent attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 for any prior taxable year. See section 104, relating to compensation for injuries or sickness, and section 105(b), relating to amounts expended for medical care, and the regulations thereunder, with regard to amounts in excess of or not attributable to deductions allowed.

    (2) If no medical expense deduction was taken in an earlier year, for example, if the standard deduction under section 141 was taken for the earlier year, the reimbursement received in the taxable year for the medical expense of the earlier year is not includible in gross income.

    (3) In order to allow the same aggregate medical expense deductions as if the reimbursement received in a subsequent year or years had been received in the year in which the payments for medical care were made, the following rules shall be followed:

  • Treas. Reg. §1.213-1(h)Substantiation of deductions. Show full text ▾ Collapse ▴

    Substantiation of deductions. In connection with claims for deductions under section 213, the taxpayer shall furnish the name and address of each person to whom payment for medical expenses was made and the amount and date of the payment thereof in each case. If payment was made in kind, such fact shall be so reflected. Claims for deductions must be substantiated, when requested by the district director, by a statement or itemized invoice from the individual or entity to which payment for medical expenses was made showing the nature of the service rendered, and to or for whom rendered; the nature of any other item of expense and for whom incurred and for what specific purpose, the amount paid therefor and the date of the payment thereof; and by such other information as the district director may deem necessary.

  • Treas. Reg. §1.213-1(i)§1.213-1(i) Show full text ▾ Collapse ▴

    If the amount of the reimbursement is equal to or less than the amount which was deducted in a prior year, the entire amount of the reimbursement shall be considered attributable to the deduction taken in such prior year (and hence includible in gross income); or

    (ii) If the amount of the reimbursement received in such subsequent year or years is greater than the amount which was deducted for the prior year, that portion of the reimbursement received which is equal in amount to the deduction taken in the prior year shall be considered as attributable to such deduction (and hence includible in gross income); but

    (iii) If the deduction for the prior year would have been greater but for the limitations on the maximum amount of such deduction provided by section 213 (c), then the amount of the reimbursement attributable to such deduction (and hence includible in gross income) shall be the amount of the reimbursement received in a subsequent year or years reduced by the amount disallowed as a deduction because of the maximum limitation, but not in excess of the deduction allowed for the previous year.

    (4) The application of subparagraphs (1), (2), and (3) of this paragraph may be illustrated by the following examples. Examples 1 and 2 reflect the maximum limitation on the medical expense deduction applicable to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1961. Examples 3 and 4 reflect the maximum limitation on the medical expense deduction applicable to taxable years beginning prior to January 1, 1962. For explanation of such maximum medical expense limitations, see paragraph (c) of this section.

  • Treas. Reg. §1.213-1(v)The cost of in-patient hospital care (including the cost of meals and lodging therein) is an expenditure for medical care. Show full text ▾ Collapse ▴

    The cost of in-patient hospital care (including the cost of meals and lodging therein) is an expenditure for medical care. The extent to which expenses for care in an institution other than a hospital shall constitute medical care is primarily a question of fact which depends upon the condition of the individual and the nature of the services he receives (rather than the nature of the institution). A private establishment which is regularly engaged in providing the types of care or services outlined in this subdivision shall be considered an institution for purposes of the rules provided herein. In general, the following rules will be applied:

270 Citing Cases

Gary M. Schwarz & Marlee Schwarz, Petitioners T.C. Memo. 2025-122 · 2025

v. Commissioner, 315 F.2d 731, 736–37 (9th Cir. 1963), aff’g T.C. Memo. 1961-256. Against this backdrop, section 183 was enacted in 1969 and effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1969. Tax Reform Act of 1969, Pub. L. No. 91-172, § 213, 83 Stat. 487, 571–72. The present text of section 183(a) through (c) provides: Sec. 183. Activities not engaged in for profit (a) General rule.—In the case of an activity engaged in by an individual or an S corporation, if such activity is not

Lucas v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2023-9 · 2023

Lucas’ diabetes did not render him “unable to engage in any substantial gainful activity” within the meaning of section 72(m)(7) and its accompanying regulations.

Salter v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2022-29 · 2022

However, the additional tax does not apply “to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213” for medical ex- penses.

74), that depreciation has been held not to be an expenditure or payment for purposes of a charitable contribution deduction under sec. 170, see Orr v. United States, 343 F.2d 553 (5th Cir. 1965), or for purposes of a medical expense deduction under sec. 213, see Gordon v. Commissioner, 37 T.C. 986 (1962). In distinguishing those decisions, the Supreme Court stated: Section 263 is concerned, however, with the capital nature of an expenditure and not with its timing, as are the phrases “payment *

74), that depreciation has been held not to be an expenditure or payment for purposes of a charitable contribution deduction under sec. 170, see Orr v. United States, 343 F.2d 553 (5th Cir. 1965), or for purposes of a medical expense deduction under sec. 213, see Gordon v. Commissioner, 37 T.C. 986 (1962). In distinguishing those decisions, the Supreme Court stated: Section 263 is concerned, however, with the capital nature of an expenditure and not with its timing, as are the phrases “payment *

74), that depreciation has been held not to be an expenditure or payment for purposes of a charitable contribution deduction under sec. 170, see Orr v. United States, 343 F.2d 553 (5th Cir. 1965), or for purposes of a medical expense deduction under sec. 213, see Gordon v. Commissioner, 37 T.C. 986 (1962). In distinguishing those decisions, the Supreme Court stated: Section 263 is concerned, however, with the capital nature of an expenditure and not with its timing, as are the phrases “payment *

Medical and Dental Expenses Section 213 allows a deduction for the cost ofmedical care not paid for by insurance.

26, 1999).¹4 For example, if"the threshold amount ofmedical deductions under section 213" changes as the result ofa partnership-level determination, that computational adjustment "do[es] not ¹4Sec.

26, 1999).¹4 For example, if"the threshold amount ofmedical deductions under section 213" changes as the result ofa partnership-level determination, that computational adjustment "do[es] not ¹4Sec.

26, 1999).¹4 For example, if"the threshold amount ofmedical deductions under section 213" changes as the result ofa partnership-level determination, that computational adjustment "do[es] not ¹4Sec.

26, 1999).¹4 For example, if"the threshold amount ofmedical deductions under section 213" changes as the result ofa partnership-level determination, that computational adjustment "do[es] not ¹4Sec.

26, 1999).¹4 For example, if"the threshold amount ofmedical deductions under section 213" changes as the result ofa partnership-level determination, that computational adjustment "do[es] not ¹4Sec.

26, 1999).¹4 For example, if"the threshold amount ofmedical deductions under section 213" changes as the result ofa partnership-level determination, that computational adjustment "do[es] not ¹4Sec.

The regulations promulgated under section 213 also require that taxpayers adequately substantiate their claimed medical expense deductions.

26, 1999).¹4 For example, if"the threshold amount ofmedical deductions under section 213" changes as the result ofa partnership-level determination, that computational adjustment "do[es] not ¹4Sec.

26, 1999).¹4 For example, if"the threshold amount ofmedical deductions under section 213" changes as the result ofa partnership-level determination, that computational adjustment "do[es] not ¹4Sec.

26, 1999).¹4 For example, if"the threshold amount ofmedical deductions under section 213" changes as the result ofa partnership-level determination, that computational adjustment "do[es] not ¹4Sec.

We hold that they are not, except inasmuch as their expenses for travel health insurance may be deductible under section 213(a).

The following exception is relevant: (B) Medical expenses.--Distributions made to the employee * * * to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care * * *.

We hold that they are not, except inasmuch as their expenses for travel health insurance may be deductible under section 213(a).

t has conceded deductions of$1,131 for union dues. S_e_e supra p. 26. The $669 remaining in dispute for each year chiefly represents premiums paid for supplemental health insurance, which could be deductible (ifat all) only as medical expenses under section 213. During the tax periods at issue health insurance premiums paid by an employee were deductible only to the extent they exceeded 7.5% ofadjusted gross income (AGI). See sec. 213(a).5 Petition- ers' AGI for 2011 and 2012 far exceeds $8,920

t has conceded deductions of$1,131 for union dues. S_e_e supra p. 26. The $669 remaining in dispute for each year chiefly represents premiums paid for supplemental health insurance, which could be deductible (ifat all) only as medical expenses under section 213. During the tax periods at issue health insurance premiums paid by an employee were deductible only to the extent they exceeded 7.5% ofadjusted gross income (AGI). See sec. 213(a).5 Petition- ers' AGI for 2011 and 2012 far exceeds $8,920

We hold that they are not, except inasmuch as their expenses for travel health insurance may be deductible under section 213(a).

While these items are no doubt beneficial to petitioners and their family, section 213 does not allow a deduction for amounts spent to purchase a medicine or drug for which no prescription is required.

A taxpayerwho claims a deduction under section 213 must "furnish the name and address ofeach person to whom payment for medical expenses was made and the amount and date ofthe payment thereofin each case." Sec.

(2)(B) provides an exception to this rule: With exceptions not relevant here, an early distribution from a qualified retirement plan is not subject to the 10% additional tax to the extent it does not exceed "the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 * * * for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care (determined without regard to whether the * * * [taxpayer] itemizes deductions for such taxable year)." Section 213(a) in turn allows as a deduction "the expenses paid during

ical care (determined without regard to whether the employee itemizes deductions for such taxable year)." Section 213 in turn allows as a deduction "the expenses paid during the taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, for medical care ofthe taxpayer, his spouse, or a dependent (as defined in section 152, determined without regard to subsections -6- (b)(1), (b)(2), and (d)(1)(B) thereof), to the extent that such expenses exceed 7.5 percent ofadjusted gross income."4 Although

"[m]edical expenses." It provides, with exceptions not rele- vant here, that an early distribution from a qualified retirement plan is not subject to the 10% additional tax to the extent it does not exceed "the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 * * * for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care." As in effect for 2010, section 213(a) allowed as a deduction "the expenses paid during the taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, for medical care oft

-6- allowable as a deduction under section 213 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care (determined without regardto whetherthe employee itemizes deductions for such taxable year)." Section 213 in turn allows as a deduction "the expenses paid during the taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, for medical care ofthe taxpayer, his

n Security denied the claim and petitioner found it necessaryto sue, alleging breach of contract and breach ofthe covenant ofgood faith and fair dealing. The $65,000 7 The exclusion does not extend to amounts attributable to deductions allowed under sec. 213 (relating to medical expenses) for any prior taxable year. See Watts v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-103, 2009 WL 1391414, at *5 n.10. - 26 - that petitionerreceived in settlement ofhis suit essentially represented a substitute for what he

Section 213 carves out a limited exception to the general rule in section 262 that prohibits the deduction ofpersonal, living, or family expenses. Jacobs v. Commissioner, 62 T.C. 813, 818 (1974). Section 1.213-1(e)(1)(ii), Income Tax Regs., provides that medical care deductions will be confined strictly to expenses incurred primarily for the preven

n 2004. Respondent concedes that petitioner is entitled to deduct $561 claimed on her Schedule C for insurance but argues that the remaining $352 should be reported on her Schedule A as a personal medical expense subject to the limitations found in section 213. At trial petitioner conceded that this $352 was a personal medical expense. 2. Interest The parties disagree as to whether petitioner is entitled to a $1,600 deduction for interest expenses she claims to have paid with respect to three cr

(a) In General.--Except in the case ofamounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- (1) amounts received under workmen's compensation acts as compensation for personal injuries or sickness; - 8 - [*8] (2) the amount ofany damages (other than punitive damages) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums

An expenditure for medical care is deductible ifit is strictly confined to expenses incurred primarily .·7- [*7] for the prevention or alleviation ofa physical or mental defect or illness.

A taxpayerwho claims a deduction under section 213 must "furnishthe name and address ofeach person to whompayment for medical expenses was made and the amount and date ofthe paymentthereofin each case." Sec.

Medical and Dental Expenses Under section 213, individuals are allowed to deduct medical and dental expenses paid during the taxable year that are not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, but only to the extent the expenses exceed 7.5% ofadjusted gross mcome.

McGraw v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2013-152 · 2013

A further exception appears in section 72(t)(2)(B), captioned "[m]edical expenses." It provides, with exceptions not relevant here, that an early distribution from a qualified retirement plan is not subject to the 10% additional tax to the extent it does not exceed "the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 * * * for amounts paid during the .

Adams v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2013-92 · 2013

A taxpayerwho claims a deduction under section 213 "shall furnish the name and address ofeach person to whom payment for medical expenses was made and the amount and date ofthe payment thereofin each case." Sec.

A taxpayerwho claims a deduction under section 213 must "furnishthe name and address ofeach person to whompayment for medical expenses was made and the amount and date ofthe paymentthereofin each case." Sec.

Longino v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2013-80 · 2013

Regulations promulgatedpursuant to section 213 provide that "[d]eductions for expenditures for medical care allowable under section 213 will be confined strictly to expenses incurred primarily for the prevention or alleviation ofa physical or "Because sec.

A taxpayerwho claims a deduction under section 213 must "furnishthe name and address ofeach person to whompayment for medical expenses was made and the amount and date ofthe paymentthereofin each case." Sec.

A taxpayer claiming a deduction under section 213 must "furnish the name and address ofeach person to whom payment for medical expenses was made and the amount and date ofthe payment thereofin each case." Sec.

A taxpayerwho claims a deduction under section 213 must "furnish the name and address ofeach person to whom payment for medical expenses was made and the amount and date ofthe paymentthereofin each case." Sec.

Fernandez v. Commissioner 138 T.C. No. 20 · 2012

(a) In General.-Except in the case ofamounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include- (1) amounts received under workmen's compensation acts as compensation for personal injuries or sickness; Regulations promulgated under section 104 further explain the exclusion: Section 104(a)(1) excludes from gross income amounts which are

O'Connor v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2012-317 · 2012

(a) In General.--Exceptin the case ofamounts attributable to - 6 - [*6] (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount ofany damages (other than punitive damages) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account ofpersonal physical injuries or physical sickness; In interpreting

Fernandez v. Commissioner 138 T.C. 378 · 2012

— Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include — • (1) amounts received under workmen’s compensation acts as compensation for personal injuries or sickness; Regulations promulgated under section 104 further explain the exclusion: Section 104(a)(1) excludes from gross income amounts which

Therefore, under the clear language of section 72(t) (2) (]B), we hold that the portion of the defaulted loan that equals the amount of the deduction allowed for medical expenses under section 213 is excepted from the 10-percent additional tax under section 72(t); regrettably for petitioner, the balance of such loan is subject to the additional tax.

Westsphere Management, Corp., Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2011-19 · 2011

executed documents for two additional plans, also effective as of November 2, 2001: (1) A "Medical Reimbursement Plan of Westsphere Management Corp." whereby Westsphere, "in addition to providing any basic medical insurance coverage for its employees", agreed to reimburse employee medical expenses, as defined in section 213, and (2) a "Diagnostic Medical Reimbursement Plan" whereby Westsphere, "in addition to providing any basic medical insurance coverage for its officers", - 9 - agreed to reim

Regs., says: Changes in a partner's tax liability with respect to affected items that do not require partner-level determinations (such as the threshold amount of medical deductions under section 213 that changes as the result of determinations made at the partnership level) are computational adjustments that are directly assessed.

M As, previously stated, we hold tihat petitioner has not established thatethe $5 56Ë reimbursed expenses paidsto decedênt' s caïegivers are deductible as medical expenses under section 213 (a) To reflect thetparties concessions and our holdings hereïn, Decision will be entered under Rule 155 .

Zhang v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2011-118 · 2011

ses allegedly relate, Zhang cannot deduct temployee benefits provided to herself. A sole proprietorship and its proprietor are the same entity. See Osborne v. Commissioder, T.C. Memo. 2002-11. Moreover, although medical expenses åre deductible under sec. 213 even if they are expenses not rülated to a business, Zhang has not demonstrated that the portion of the $22,000 consisting of her own medical expenses, if any, was not (continued...) !i - 17 - a. Zhang's Credibility Zhang did not testify cre

Accordingly, we hold that petitioner is entitled to a medical expense deduction only for the $3,235.37 she paid for prescription drugs, $424 paid for doctor's visits, - 8 - and $298.34 paid for travel to doctors that the parties stipulated.

Linzy v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2011-264 · 2011

To substantiate medical expenses under section 213, the taxpayer must furnish the name and address of each person to whom payment was made and the amount and date of each such payment.

f November 2, 2001: (1) A "Medical Reimbursement Plan of Westsphere Management Corp." whereby Westsphere, "in addition to providing any basic medical insurance coverage for its employees", agreed to reimburse employee medical expenses, as defined in section 213, and (2) a "Diagnostic Medical Reimbursement Plan" whereby Westsphere, "in addition to providing any basic medical insurance coverage for its officers", - 9 - agreed to reimburse them and their families for expenses of "diagnostic medical

Thompson v. Commissioner 137 T.C. 220 · 2011

Regs., says: Changes in a partner’s tax liability with respect to affected items that do not require partner-level determinations (such as the threshold amount of medical deductions under section 213 that changes as the result of determinations made at the partnership level) are computational adjustments that are directly assessed.

O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner 134 T.C. No. 4 · 2010

Non-issues The surgical procedures involved in this case are startling, and to avoid distraction from the actual issues, it is expedient to affirm what is not at issue here : Neither the tax collector nor the Tax Court sits as aboard of medical review, as if it were reconsidering, validating, or overruling the medical profession's judgments about what medical care is appropriate or effective for what medical conditions .

Freedman v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2010-155 · 2010

) ;ED JUL 2 12010 may look behind the notice of deficiency to determine whether it is valid; (2) whether petitioner or respondent bears the burden of proof pursuant to sections 7491(a)3 and 6201(d) ; (3) whether petitioner is entitled to deductions, pursuant to section 213, for medical and dental expenses of $9,871, subject to the 7 .5- percent-of-adjusted-gross-income limitation of section 213(a), as itemized deductions for tax year 2005 ; .(4) whether petitioner is entitled to deductions, pur

Medical .Expenses Under section 213, individuals are allowed to deduct the expenses paid for the "medical care" of the taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, or a dependent, to the extent the expenses exceed 7 .5 percent of adjusted gross income and are not compensated for by insurance or otherwise .

e shall sometimes refer to the allowance that is, or was, excludible from gross income under sec. 107 and its predecessors as the excludible parsonage allowance. 'According to respondent, The Senate Committee Report does not mention the provi- sion [sec. 213 (b) (11) of the Revenue Act of 1921], and the House Conference Report indicates only that the House accepted the Senate version with an amendment making an unspecified "clerical change." See S. Rep. No. 275 at 14 (1921); H.R. Conf. Rep. No.

The disallowance of petitioner's $31,570 business expense deduction increases petitioner's adjusted gross income by a like amount, and thus the 7 .5-percent floor imposed .by section 213 is increased by -11- $2,367 .75 ($31,570 x' 0 .075 = $2,367 .75) .

Theodore M. & Jacqueline Green, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2010-109 · 2010

" We have characterized section 213 as carving Put "a-limite d exception" to the general rule .in section 262 that prohibits the deduction of personal, living, or family expenses .

Dean F. & Jocelyne S. Pace, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2010-272 · 2010

-15- express provision of their deductibility under section 213 (medical expenses) alone.

re liable for self-employment taxes on the gross receipts reported on Schedules C of-their 2004, 2005, and 2006 returns and on gain realized-on the sale of section -1245 property in 2004, if any; (5) whether petitioners are entitled to deduct under section 213 medical expenses of $17,083 for 2006; and (6) whether petitioners are liable Efor accuracy-related penalties under section 6662(a) for the years at issue.

O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner 134 T.C. 34 · 2010

After concessions, the issue for decision is whether petitioner may deduct as a medical care expense under section 213 amounts paid in 2001 for hormone therapy, sex reassignment surgery, and breast augmentation surgery that petitioner contends were incurred in connection with a condition known as gender identity disorder.

Rob & Shirley Tyson, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2009-176 · 2009

ion 105(b) . .Under the employee benefit program'the medical and dental expenses.. to be paid. or reimbursed would be . those for which the employee . was not compensated by insurance or otherwise and which would be treated as medical expenses under section 213 . The amount that would be paid or reimbursed was limited to $10,000 per person per calendar year . The employee benefit program covered reimbursements for medical or medical-related insurance , medical .or medical-related services, life

Section 213 allows a deduction for medical expenses of the'taxpayer, his spouse, and his dependents . Sections 151 and 152 define a dependent to include,a taxpayer's child under the age of 19 or a child who is a student under the age of 24 over half of whose support was received from the taxpayer . Petitioners did not show that their son was their

Rudnick v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2009-133 · 2009

72(t)(2)(B), (E) Section 72(t)(2),(B) provides an exception to the section 72(t) additional tax for distributions made to the employee to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowabl e as a deduction under section 213 to the employee for amounts pai d during the taxable year for medical care .

(a) In General .--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc ., expenses)(cid:127)for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- (1) amounts received under workmen's compensation acts as compensation for personal injuries or sickness ; (2) the amount of any ,damages (other than punitive damages) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums

Hellesen v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2009-143 · 2009

(a) In General .--Except ; in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical,-.

Napoliello v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2009-104 · 2009

1997) . Computational affected items include those items on a partner's return that vary if there is a change in the individual partner's adjusted -13- gross income, for example, the threshold; dollar limit for the~i medical expense deduction under section 213 . Sec . 301 .6231(a)(6)-1T(a)(1), Temporary Proced . & Admin . Regs, 64 Fed . Reg . .3840 (Jan . 26, 1999) . Once the-part ership-level ! ;l proceedings are completed, the Commissioner is permitted to . . .I? assess a computational adjustm

Applicable to petitioners' contention that they used a portion of their IRA distributions to pay for medical expenses is section 72(t)(2)(B), which provides : (B) Medical expenses .--Distributions made to the employee * * * to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction unde r section 213E73 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care (determined without regard to whether the employee itemizes deductions for such taxable year) .

Save v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2009-209 · 2009

(a) In General .--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc ., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- (2) the amount of any damages (other than punitive, damages) received (whether by suit or.

Expenditures which merely provide a general healt h benefit are not deductible because deductions allowable under section 213 are confined strictly to expelfses paid primarily for the prevention or alleviation of a physic l or mental defect or illness .

Section 213 permits a deduction for medical expenses that taxpayers incur and which insurance does not cover, but only to the extent that the expenses exceed 7 .5 percent of the taxpayer's adjusted gross income . Further, section 1 .213-1(h), Income Tax Regs ., requires taxpayers to substantiate their medical expenses by providing the names and add

Halby v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2009-204 · 2009

Section 1.213-1(e)(1)(ii), Income Tax Regs ., provides that amounts expended for illegal operations or treatments are not deductible and that deductions allowed under section 213 will be confined strictly to'expenses incurre d primarily for the prevention or alleviation of a physical or mental defect or illness .

Medical and Dental Expenses Section 213 permits a deduction for medical and dental expenses to the extent the expenses exceed 7 .5 percent of 2Petitioners do not claim the benefit of sec .

Sanford v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2008-158 · 2008

To substantiate deductions for medical expenses under section 213, the taxpayer must furnish the name and address of each person to whom payment for medical expenses was made and the amount and date of each payment .

espectively; a d°'(4) medical'/dental expenses of,$56 .69 for 2001 . Self-employed in ividuals may deduct 60 percent and 70- percent of their heal--h insurance premiums for .2001 and 2002, respectively, and may deduct the excess thereof pursuant to< section 213 . . Sec. 16 (1)'(1), (3) . Petitioner claimed,self- employed health'insur nce :deductions of $1,.574'and $1,991 for 2001 and 2002,-respec ively . Respondent has made no adjustment to petitioner's claim d $1,574 self-employed health insura

following two exceptions are relevant : (A) In general .--Distributions which are-- * * * * * * * (v) made to an employee after separatio n from service after attainment of age 55 , * * * * * * * (B) Medical expenses .--Distributions made to the employee * * * to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care * * * .

Michael A. & Mary Pettit, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2008-87 · 2008

(a) In General .--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc ., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- (2) the amount of any damages (other than punitive damages ) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness ; * * * For purposes of par

Ballmer v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2007-295 · 2007

(a) In General .-- Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc ., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- (2) the amount of any damages (other than punitive damages) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness ; * * * * * * * - 6 - * * *

(a) In General .--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc ., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- (2) the amount of any damages (other than punitive damages) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness ; * * * For purposes of par

Medical Care Expenses As a general rule, section 262(a) prohibits a deduction for “personal, living, or family expenses.” An exception to this general rule is provided by section 213 for certain medical care expenses.

(a) In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness; The regulations under section 104 provide that the term “damag

Nolan v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2007-306 · 2007

Medical Expenses Section 72(t)(2)(B) provides an exception to application of the section 72(t) additional tax for "Distributions made * * * to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 * * * for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care" .

Gibson v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2007-224 · 2007

(a) In General .--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc ., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- (2) the amount of any damages (other than punitive damages) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness ; 5 For the first time, in t

Seidel v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2007-45 · 2007

(a) In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages (other than punitive damages) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness; * * * * * * *

While section 213 permits a deduction for medical expenses of a taxpayer or a dependent, a taxpayer must substantiate claimed medical expense deductions. Sec. 1.213- 1(h), Income Tax Regs. Petitioners presented no documentary evidence or testimony as to specific expenses incurred in this connection. Petitioners are not entitled to any amount for a medica

The court concluded that Antarctica is a foreign country for purposes of the FLSA and based its conclusion on the particular language of the FLSA. Smith v. Raytheon Co., supra at 401-402. In the instant case, we are revisiting the same issue we discussed in Martin v. Commissioner, supra. Although the statutory and regulatory provisions

. Many of the entries on the Quicken report contain notes such as “not covered”, “co pay”, or “copayment”. Section 213(a) generally allows a deduction for expenses paid during a taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or 7 As discussed below, sec. 213 allows a deduction for medical or dental expenses to the extent that they exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. - 35 - otherwise, for medical care of the taxpayer, his or her spouse, or dependents, to the extent that such expenses exc

Mitchell v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2006-101 · 2006

The language of section 72(t)(2)(B) provides as follows: Medical expenses. Distributions made to the employee * * * to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care (determined without regard to whether the

Arnett v. Commissioner 126 T.C. 89 · 2006

The court concluded that Antarctica is a foreign country for purposes of the FLSA and based its conclusion on the particular language of the FLSA. Smith v. Raytheon Co., supra at 401-402. In the instant case, we are revisiting the same issue we discussed in Martin v. Commissioner, supra. Although the statutory and regulatory provisions

72(t)(2)(B) and section 72(t)(2)(E).1 Section 72(t)(2)(B) provides that the following distributions are not subject to the additional tax: (B) Medical expenses.--Distributions made to the employee * * * to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care (determined without regard to whether the employee itemizes deductions for such taxable year). The deduction allowed under

(a) In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include–- * * * * * * * (4) amounts received as a pension, annuity, or similar allowance for personal injuries or sickness resulting from active service in the armed forces of any country or in the Coast and Geodetic Survey or the Public Health Servi

. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 676 (1987). 2Respondent concedes medical expenses in the amount of $18,904, leaving at issue expenses in the amount of $28,666 ($47,570-$18,904). Respondent also concedes that any medical expenses allowed as a deduction under sec. 213 shall be deemed paid for by a portion of petitioner’s withdrawal from his thrift savings plan and are therefore excepted from the additional tax under sec. 72(t). Respondent further concedes that petitioner’s filing status is married filing

Charles E. & Noel K. Bradley, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2005-223 · 2005

(a) In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness * * * - 32 - Neither the statute nor the legislative history o

(a) In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness; The reference to personal injuries in this former version of t

Robert E. Corrigan, Deceased, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2005-119 · 2005

In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in exçess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness; * * * * * * * * * * Paragraph (2) shall not apply to any punitive damages in

Duncan v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2005-171 · 2005

Section 72(t)(2)(B) provides that the additional tax shall not - 7 - apply to distributions made to employees “to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care (determined without regard to whether the employee itemizes deductions for such taxable year).” The deduction allowed under section 213(a) is for “the expenses paid during the taxable year * * * for medical care *

The exception relevant to the case at hand, found in section 72(t)(2)(B), provides that the following distributions are not subject to the additional tax: Distributions made to the employee * * * to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care (determined without regard to whether the employee itemizes deductions for such taxable year).

Under section 213, individuals are allowed to deduct the expenses paid for the "medical care" of the taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, or a dependent, to the extent the expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income and are not compensated for by insurance or otherwise. The Court has determined that under section 152(e) petitioner's children do not

d a Federal income tax deficiency for petitioners’ 2000 taxable year in the amount of $1,642. After concessions, the issue for decision is whether petitioners are entitled to deduct a portion of their transportation costs as a medical expense under section 213. Background Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found. The stipulations of the parties, with accompanying exhibits, are incorporated herein by this reference. During the year 2000 and through the time the petition was filed i

Section 72(t)(2)(B) provides that the following distributions are not subject to the additional tax: (B) Medical Expenses.--Distributions made to the employee * * * to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care (determined without regard to whether the employee itemizes deductions for such taxable year).

(a) In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages (other than punitive damages) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness; * * * * * * *

Berry v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2004-11 · 2004

That section provides for an exception from the 10-percent additional tax for distributions made to employees “to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care (determined without regard to whether the employee itemizes deductions for such taxable year).” Respondent did not question petitioner’s claim that 2 All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code as amend

Venable v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2003-240 · 2003

(a) In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., - 7 - expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness; The reference to personal injuries in this former versi

Section 213 allows a deduction for expenses paid during the taxable year, not compensated by insurance or otherwise, for medical care of the taxpayer, his spouse or a dependent (as defined in section 152), to the extent that such expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income.

(a) In General.–-Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by 6 No question has been raised with respect to the burden of proof or production under sec.

Ramon J. & Sheila A. Jeanmarie, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2003-337 · 2003

(a) In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (4) amounts received as a pension, annuity, or similar allowance for personal injuries or sickness resulting from active service in the armed forces of any country or in the Coast and Geodetic Survey or the Public Health Servi

Criner v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2003-328 · 2003

84, §213B.2.a (West Supp. 2003), provides that, if there is no surviving spouse, the decedent’s estate is distributed in undivided equal shares to the surviving children of the decedent and the issue of any deceased child.8 Under Oklahoma State law, 8Oklahoma State law also provides that, when a person dies intestate leaving real property, title to the

Polone v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2003-339 · 2003

(a) In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness; The reference to personal injuries in this former version of t

(a) In General.–-Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by 6 No question has been raised with respect to the burden of proof or production under sec.

Section 72(t)(2)(B) provides for an exception to the additional tax for: Distributions made to the employee * * * to the extent such distributions do not exceed the amount allowable as a deduction under section 213 to the employee for amounts paid during the taxable year for medical care (determined without regard to whether the employee itemizes deductions for such taxable year).

Deductions for expenditures for medical care allowable under section 213 will be confined strictly to expenses incurred primarily for the prevention or alleviation of a physical or mental defect or illness.

Deductions for expenditures for medical care allowable under section 213 will be confined strictly to expenses incurred primarily for the prevention or alleviation of a physical or mental defect or illness.

Hawthorne & Vivian H. Echols, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2002-134 · 2002

In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness; * * * - 7 - petitioners may not exclude the United payments f

Collins v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2002-115 · 2002

In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness; 4 For the year in issue, personal injuries included both physi

espective of the lack of a profit motive. Sec. 183(b)(2). We similarly find that the cost incurred by petitioners for Jennifer’s medical expenses is a personal family expense, the deduction of which is prohibited by section 262, except as allowed by section 213. Jennifer was covered by the health insurance policy owned by her father. Petitioner purported to create a “Self Insured Medical Plan Aspiring Artists Company”. - 15 - Under the “plan”, petitioner agreed that Aspiring Artists would pay up

Hudson v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2002-134 · 2002

In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness; * * * - 7 - petitioners may not exclude the United payments f

Manighalam v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2002-115 · 2002

In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deduc.tions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- (2) the amount.

Saunders v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2002-143 · 2002

stained. As to 1994, we find that petitioner’s medical expense deduction for that year is also overstated to the extent that it includes amounts withheld for Medicare from his and his spouse’s wages. Medicare taxes do not qualify for deduction under section 213. Sec. 1.213-1(e)(4)(i)(a)(3), Income Tax Regs. Taking into account the increase to petitioner’s 1994 adjusted gross income resulting from our holding regarding the Schedule E deductions, petitioner’s concession with respect to the medical

2,500 Prescription drugs 1,300 10,200 - 3 - The 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income limitation pursuant to section 213(a) reduced this amount by $3,771 so that the net medical expense deduction was $6,429.

Under section 213, individuals are entitled to an itemized deduction for amounts paid for medical care to the extent that these expenses exceed 7.5 percent of the individual's adjusted gross income. Petitioner's adjusted gross income was $41,471. Therefore, petitioner may deduct medical expenses only to the extent that they exceed $3,110. The substantiat

In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages (other than punitive damages) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness; * * * * * * *

Respondent contends that, since the procedures were classified as cosmetic by petitioner’s surgeon,4 they were cosmetic for purposes of applying section 213(d)(9).

Cotton v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2000-333 · 2000

To substantiate medical and dental expenses under section 213, a taxpayer must provide the name and address of each person to whom payment was made and the amount and date of each payment.

James Lewis & Lillian E. Hunter, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2000-249 · 2000

The issues for decision are whether petitioners have substantiated $5,704 in medical and dental expenses under section 213 and whether petitioners are entitled to deduct $38,829 in alleged casualty losses under section 165.1 1 All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

Charles & Beatrice M. Reynolds, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2000-20 · 2000

Medical Expenses Under section 213, individuals are allowed to deduct the expenses paid for the "medical care" of the taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, or a dependent, to the extent the expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income and are not compensated for by insurance or otherwise.

Marsh v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2000-11 · 2000

(a) In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness; (3) amounts received through accident or health insurance for

Nwachukwu v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2000-27 · 2000

Section 213 allows a deduction for expenses paid during the taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, for medical care of the taxpayer, his spouse, or a dependent, to the extent that such expenses exceed 7.5 percent of the adjusted gross income. The taxpayer must substantiate any deductions - 8 - claimed under section 213 by fur

Cotton v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2000-333 · 2000

To substantiate medical and dental expenses under section 213, a taxpayer must provide the name and address of each person to whom payment was made and the amount and date of each payment.

Ilija & Branka Mitic, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2000-144 · 2000

Section 213 allows a deduction for expenses paid during the taxable year, and not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, for medical care of a taxpayer, his spouse, or a dependent to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of the taxpayer’s 3Each petitioner and respondent signed the first stipulation of settled issues filed in this ca

Bland v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2000-98 · 2000

(a) In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness; (Section 104(a)(2) was amended by section 1605(a) of the Small

Yancy D. & Rita K. Greer, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 2000-25 · 2000

Section 104(a) states in relevant part as follows: (a) In general.–- Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include–- * * * * * * * (2) the amount of any damages received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal injuries or sickness; As is noted, “interest” on funds relating to pers

487, 571-572, to deal with "hobby losses"; i.e., losses in an activity not engaged in for profit. Section 183(d) provided a presumption that an activity is engaged in for profit if a gross income test is satisfied for 2 out of 5 consecutive years. The time periods were modified by later statutes. Special rules were provided for c

Massa v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 1999-63 · 1999

penses in the total amount of $7,960. In the statutory notice of deficiency, respondent disallowed any deduction for $2,696 of the claimed expenses on the ground that petitioner did not establish that the disallowed amount meets the requirements of section 213. This disallowed amount represents the costs which petitioner claimed for his special diet. Section 213(a) allows as a deduction the expenses paid during the taxable year, not compensated by insurance or otherwise, for the medical care of

Paul F. & Sherry L. Dickie, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1999-138 · 1999

Dickie (petitioner) as a musician was an activity "not engaged in for profit" within the meaning of section 183 for the taxable years at issue, (2) whether petitioner is entitled to a medical expense deduction under section 213 for taxable year 1994, and (3) whether petitioners are liable for accuracy-related penalties for the taxable years at issue.

Tae M. & Young J. Kim, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1999-261 · 1999

670.36 of the claimed medical expenses in issue, which approximates the amount 3 Respondent's adjustments to petitioners' medical expense deductions for 1993 and 1994, to the extent based on his adjustments to petitioners' adjusted gross income and sec. 213 limitations for 1993 and 1994, are computational and will be resolved by the Court's holding on the first issue in this case. - 15 - claimed by petitioners and disallowed by respondent for certain acupuncture treatments. Section 213(a) allows

Stephen A. Lenn & Ksenia Lenn, Petitioners T.C. Memo. 1998-85 · 1998

chool system. P unsuccessfully sued the public school district to obtain reimbursement for the tuition of a residential private school for S. S attended the private school, and P has been allowed to deduct the tuition costs as medical expenses under sec. 213, I.R.C. P claimed a deduction for the legal expenses incurred in the lawsuit against the public school as medical expenses under sec. 213, I.R.C. R disallowed the deduction because the lawsuit was not necessary for S to attend the private sc

Section 213 in relevant part provides: SEC. 213(a). Allowance of Deduction.--There shall be allowed as a deduction the expenses paid during the taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, for medical care of the taxpayer * * * to the extent that such expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. The taxpayer must substantia

Kenneth & Linda J. Logie, Petitioner T.C. Memo. 1998-387 · 1998

of this record, the Court is unable to ascertain whether the medical expenses claimed on the return in fact exclude the expenses for hearing aids, or the extent to which any of these items may represent allowable unreimbursed medical expenses under sec. 213. - 10 - issue. Consequently, we hold that petitioners are liable for tax on Social Security benefits pursuant to section 86. Accuracy-Related Penalty Respondent determined that petitioners are liable for an accuracy-related penalty under sect

oncerning the impact of the asbestos removal (continued...) -25- concurrently, the asbestos removal and remodeling were not part of a general plan of rehabilitation because they were separate and distinct projects, conceived of independently, undertaken for different purposes, and performed by separate contractors; and (4) using the principles of section 213 (which allows individuals to deduct certain personal medical expenses that are capital in nature) and section 1.162-10, Income Tax Regs.

Picard v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 1997-320 · 1997

In General.--Except in the case of amounts attributable to (and not in excess of) deductions allowed under section 213 (relating to medical, etc., expenses) for any prior taxable year, gross income does not include-- (1) amounts received under workmen's compensation acts as compensation for personal injuries or sickness * * * The regulations further provide that the exclusion under section 104(a)(1) applies in the case of amounts received "under a statu

and remodeling were not part of a general plan of rehabilitation because they were separate and distinct projects, conceived of independently, undertaken for different purposes, and performed by separate contractors; and (4) using the principles of section 213 (which allows individuals to deduct certain personal medical expenses that are capital in nature) and section 1.162-10, Income Tax Regs, (which allows a trade or business to deduct medical expenses paid to employees on account of sickness)

Section 936(h)(1) provides that any income of an electing corporation attributable to intangible property is deemed to be the income of, and is taxable to, the shareholders of the section 936 corporation.

Section 213 allows a deduction for expenses paid for medical care of the taxpayer, his spouse, or a dependent, which is not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, to the extent that such expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. The amount of the deduction for medical expenses obviously depends upon the taxpayer's adjusted gross inc

Kent Maerki & Kathleen Turner, Petitioners T.C. Memo. 1995-460 · 1995

fied dependent care programs. Petitioners have neither proven nor argued that their situation meets the requirements of section 5Petitioners elected the standard deduction on their return and, therefore, make no claim for an itemized deduction under sec. 213. - 6 - 129. We sustain respondent's disallowance of the deduction for child care expenses. Petitioner testified that $600 of the amount claimed as employee benefits was a reimbursement to petitioner Kathleen Turner for travel expenses she in

Fort Howard Corp. v. Commissioner 103 T.C. 345 · 1994

74), that depreciation has been held not to be an expenditure or payment for purposes of a charitable contribution deduction under sec. 170, see Orr v. United States, 343 F.2d 553 (5th Cir. 1965), or for purposes of a medical expense deduction under sec. 213, see Gordon v. Commissioner, 37 T.C. 986 (1962). In distinguishing those decisions, the Supreme Court stated: Section 263 is concerned, however, with the capital nature of an expenditure and not with its timing, as are the phrases “payment *

Magdalin v. Commissioner T.C. Memo. 2008-293 · 2008
Baker v. Commissioner 122 T.C. 143 · 2004
Dwyer v. Commissioner 106 T.C. 337 · 1996
Balch v. Commissioner 100 T.C. 331 · 1993
Stocks v. Commissioner 98 T.C. 1 · 1992
Downey v. Commissioner 97 T.C. 150 · 1991
Polyak v. Commissioner 94 T.C. 337 · 1990
Metzger v. Commissioner 88 T.C. 834 · 1987
Egolf v. Commissioner 87 T.C. 34 · 1986
Bent v. Commissioner 87 T.C. 236 · 1986
Reed v. Commissioner 82 T.C. 208 · 1984
Davidson v. Commissioner 82 T.C. 434 · 1984
Ditunno v. Commissioner 80 T.C. 362 · 1983
Vickers v. Commissioner 80 T.C. 394 · 1983
Moss v. Commissioner 80 T.C. 1073 · 1983
Benningfield v. Commissioner 81 T.C. 408 · 1983
Estate of Smith v. Commissioner 79 T.C. 313 · 1982
Wendland v. Commissioner 79 T.C. 355 · 1982
Fay v. Commissioner 76 T.C. 408 · 1981
Mattes v. Commissioner 77 T.C. 650 · 1981
Derr v. Commissioner 77 T.C. 708 · 1981
McGuire v. Commissioner 77 T.C. 765 · 1981
Voigt v. Commissioner 74 T.C. 82 · 1980
Gallagher v. Commissioner 75 T.C. 313 · 1980
Archer v. Commissioner 73 T.C. 963 · 1980
Dyer v. Commissioner 71 T.C. 560 · 1979
Haines v. Commissioner 71 T.C. 644 · 1979
Elwood v. Commissioner 72 T.C. 264 · 1979
Greenspun v. Commissioner 72 T.C. 931 · 1979
Hernandez v. Commissioner 72 T.C. 1234 · 1979
Jewell v. Commissioner 69 T.C. 791 · 1978
Greer v. Commissioner 70 T.C. 294 · 1978
Reading v. Commissioner 70 T.C. 730 · 1978
Focht v. Commissioner 68 T.C. 223 · 1977
Kilpatrick v. Commissioner 68 T.C. 469 · 1977
Coombs v. Commissioner 67 T.C. 426 · 1976
Randolph v. Commissioner 67 T.C. 481 · 1976
McGowan v. Commissioner 67 T.C. 599 · 1976
Hodge v. Commissioner 64 T.C. 616 · 1975
Turecamo v. Commissioner 64 T.C. 720 · 1975
Hradesky v. Commissioner 65 T.C. 87 · 1975
Brown v. Commissioner 62 T.C. 551 · 1974
Jacobs v. Commissioner 62 T.C. 813 · 1974
Cleary v. Commissioner 60 T.C. 133 · 1973
Taubman v. Commissioner 60 T.C. 814 · 1973
American Foundry v. Commissioner 59 T.C. 231 · 1972
Volwiler v. Commissioner 57 T.C. 367 · 1971
Blanco v. Commissioner 56 T.C. 512 · 1971
Granan v. Commissioner 55 T.C. 753 · 1971
Estate of Fried v. Commissioner 54 T.C. 805 · 1970
O'Hare v. Commissioner 54 T.C. 874 · 1970
Morgan v. Commissioner 55 T.C. 376 · 1970
Ripple v. Commissioner 54 T.C. 1442 · 1970
Greisdorf v. Commissioner 54 T.C. 1684 · 1970
McDermid v. Commissioner 54 T.C. 1727 · 1970
James v. Commissioner 53 T.C. 63 · 1969
Gutierrez v. Commissioner 53 T.C. 394 · 1969
Altman v. Commissioner 53 T.C. 487 · 1969
Rose v. Commissioner 52 T.C. 521 · 1969
Miller v. Commissioner 52 T.C. 752 · 1969
Grunwald v. Commissioner 51 T.C. 108 · 1968
Fischer v. Commissioner 50 T.C. 164 · 1968
Montgomery v. Commissioner 51 T.C. 410 · 1968
Robinson v. Commissioner 51 T.C. 520 · 1968
Gerstacker v. Commissioner 49 T.C. 522 · 1968
Lambert v. Commissioner 49 T.C. 57 · 1967
Larkin v. Commissioner 48 T.C. 629 · 1967
Buck v. Commissioner 47 T.C. 113 · 1966
Salkov v. Commissioner 46 T.C. 190 · 1966
Harding v. Commissioner 46 T.C. 502 · 1966
Harris v. Commissioner 46 T.C. 672 · 1966
Atkinson v. Commissioner 44 T.C. 39 · 1965
Hodge v. Commissioner 44 T.C. 186 · 1965
Mortrud v. Commissioner 44 T.C. 208 · 1965
Pessin v. Commissioner 44 T.C. 590 · 1965
Robinson v. Commissioner 42 T.C. 403 · 1964
Estate of Miller v. Commissioner 42 T.C. 593 · 1964
Counts v. Commissioner 42 T.C. 755 · 1964
Mitchell v. Commissioner 42 T.C. 953 · 1964
Conroy v. Commissioner 41 T.C. 685 · 1964
Starrett v. Commissioner 41 T.C. 877 · 1964
Litchfield v. Commissioner 40 T.C. 967 · 1963
Gerard v. Commissioner 37 T.C. 826 · 1962
Gordon v. Commissioner 37 T.C. 986 · 1962
Edwards v. Commissioner 39 T.C. 78 · 1962
Kilgore v. Commissioner 38 T.C. 340 · 1962
Kniffen v. Commissioner 39 T.C. 553 · 1962
Winter v. Commissioner 36 T.C. 14 · 1961
Carlisle v. Commissioner 37 T.C. 424 · 1961
Lichterman v. Commissioner 37 T.C. 586 · 1961
Hendrick v. Commissioner 35 T.C. 1223 · 1961
Carasso v. Commissioner 34 T.C. 1139 · 1960
Stanford v. Commissioner 34 T.C. 1150 · 1960
Easson v. Commissioner 33 T.C. 963 · 1960
Weaver v. Commissioner 32 T.C. 411 · 1959
Thoene v. Commissioner 33 T.C. 62 · 1959
Bilder v. Commissioner 33 T.C. 155 · 1959
Namrow v. Commissioner 33 T.C. 419 · 1959
Delp v. Commissioner 30 T.C. 1230 · 1958
Donnelly v. Commissioner 28 T.C. 1278 · 1957
George v. Commissioner 26 T.C. 396 · 1956
Handfield v. Commissioner 23 T.C. 633 · 1955
M/V Nonsuco, Inc. v. Commissioner 23 T.C. 361 · 1954
Kerkhof v. MCI Worldcom, Inc. 282 F.3d 44 · Cir.
R Ball for R Ball III by Appt v. Commissioner of IRS 742 F.3d 552 · Cir.
Scott v. United States 328 F.3d 132 · Cir.
United States v. Retic · Cir.
United States v. Sabean 885 F.3d 27 · Cir.
amazon.com Inc. & Subsidiaries v. Cir 934 F.3d 976 · Cir.
Kenney v. Helix TCS 939 F.3d 1106 · Cir.
Muto v. CBS Corp. 668 F.3d 53 · Cir.
United States v. Courtney Butler (98-5552) and Julius Retic (98-5554) 207 F.3d 839 · Cir.
Scott v. United States 328 F.3d 132 · Cir.
Kaylan A. Lewis v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue · Cir.

New cases, delivered.

Get notified when new Tax Court opinions drop.