Is a tax
deduction available for alternative medical care?
“Alternative”
does not necessarily mean unusual. It includes, for example, chiropractic care.
As a decades-long gym rat and chiropractic patient, I find that rather amusing.
What does
the tax Code want to see before you are permitted a deductible medical expense?
You may ask:
who cares? Starting in 2018 more and more people will claim the standard
deduction rather than itemize under the new tax law. And – even if you itemize
– what is the nondeductible percentage for medical expenses anyway – 2%, 7.5%,
10%, 100% of adjusted gross income? Congress abuses this deduction like an
unwanted toy.
I’ll tell
you why: because you have flexible spending accounts, health savings accounts
and their siblings. To be reimbursable the expense must meet the definition of
a deductible medical expense. This is a separate matter from whether you
actually deduct any medical expenses on your tax return.
Let’s look
at the Malev case.
Victoria
Malev suffers from spinal disease. She had seen a chiropractor, but that
offered only temporary and partial relief from pain.
You can
probably guess the next type of doctor she would see, but Malev wanted nothing
to do with surgery and its associated risks.
She instead
decided to try four different alternative treatments.
The Court was
diplomatic:
… Petitioner subscribed to various forms of treatment from four individuals, none of whom would be commonly recognized as a conventional medical caregiver. And to be sure, none of the methods utilized by these individuals would commonly be recognized as a conventional medical treatment. The methods Petitioner subscribed to might be termed “alternative medicine” by the polite, but we expect the less tolerant would characterize the treatments in other than legitimate or complimentary terms.”
When asked,
Malev said that she had greatly improved.
She went to
see an M.D a few years later – in 2016 – and the doctor suggested surgery. The
doctor further suggested she investigate “integrative” medical care.
Seems to me
she was already doing that.
Question: does she have a medical deduction?
The Court
pointed out the obvious: had she seen the M.D. first, there would be no issue,
as the M.D. recommended she investigate alternative medicine. By reversing the
order, she was claiming medical deductions before the (traditional) medical diagnosis.
One can tell
that the Court liked Malev. The Court acknowledged her “sincere belief” that
the treatments received were beneficial, pointed out that she had not
previously known the four providers and there was no reason to believe she
would pay them except for the treatments given.
The Court
looked at what the Code and Regulations do NOT require of deductible medical
expenses:
(1) The services do not have to be
furnished by one licensed to practice medicine in any particular discipline;
(2) The services do not have to be
provided in-person;
(3) The services do not need to be
universally accepted as effective; and
(4) The services do not have to be
successful.
Malev could
immediately use (1) and (3).
The Court
was skeptical, but it wanted to allow for the wild card: the role a person’s
state of mind plays in the treatment of disease.
Malev
believed. The Court believed that she believed.
She got her
medical deduction.
However, in an
effort to indicate how fact-specific the case was, the Court continued:
… it is appropriate to note that we fully appreciate the position taken by the Respondent in this case, and [we] consider their position to be more than justified.”
I read Malev
as a one-off. If you are thinking of alternative or integrative health care,
see an M.D. – preferably an open-minded one – first. It will save both of us tax
headaches.
