- quote -

I'm bound and determined to quit using clichés.

Joel Berry, CPA
Sugar Land, Texas

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

- quote -

I was wrong for letting this go as far as I did.
She is my wife and the mother of my sons. I often
introduce her as my daughter. End of parsing.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Dick Adams wrote:
- quote -

Tongues will surely wag now, Dick. I should only assume,
and hope to be correct, that your mistress is also your
roommate, lived with you at least 12 months of the tax year,
and thus qualifies as an exemption. If not........

Cheer$,
HL

================================================== ==========
Moderator: Don't worry Harlan; I've got it covered. <g================================================ ============

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Tripp Knightly wrote:

- quote -

There was a recent Notice that teeth whitening DOES NOT
qualify for the medical deduction.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Tripp Knightly wrote:

- quote -

Nothing in the tax law has changed. In your quote from Pub
502 above, look carefully at the last word. That covers it.

cheer$,
Harlan Lunsford, EA in LA

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Tripp Knightly wrote:

- quote -

No. Orthodontics required to correct a medical problem (overbite,
underbite, crowded teeth, etc) are currently deductible and have
been for decades. The FSA custodian appears to be trying to blame
the tax code because the FSA custodian has chosen to have tighter
reimbursment rules than the law requires.

- quote -

Except, as I understand it, FSAs can have tighter standards for
reimbursement than the law requires.

- quote -

"Elective" does not mean the item is not deductible. It just
means you don't have to have the procedure immediately to keep
really bad things from happening. I guess if a woman and her
doctor scheduled the cesarian delivery she was going to need
for a specific day, these "individuals" you're dealing with
would say it was elective and refuse to pay.

The phrase "medical necessity" is generally followed by "or
appropriate" in relevant regs I scanned. Straightening
someone's crooked teeth so they won't fall out before he's 40
years old may not be a "medical necessity" but it is certainly
medically appropriate.

- quote -

Teeth whitening is a cosmetic procedure just like hair
transplants. I would not expect the cost to be deductible.

- quote -

Only their implication that their behavior is required by law
is wrong. They can have tighter rules if they choose. Personally,
I believe if they've decided to take advantage of people - oops I
mean be horses's ..... I mean be not nice, they should own up to
it instead of trying to blame the feds.

On the other hand, if they're mistaken about what the law requires,
someone should educate them in a polite but firm manner.

Regards,
Bill
~~~~
Associate Professor of Accounting
Longwood University
Department of Accounting, Economics & Finance
http://www.longwood.edu/staff/wpbrown/
Opinions expressed by me are mine, not my employer's.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Tripp Knightly wrote:

- quote -

First, you need to check the FSA plan document itself to see
if this expense would be allowed. While the IRC tells us
the limits of what an FSA can deduct, as I recall a plan
*can* be written to be more restrictive than that. If the
plan is more restrictive, it governs.

Second, presuming the plan allows for any medical expense
that is deductible for federal income tax purposes, the
issue may be recently issued Revenue Ruling 2003-57. You
can read the ruling at:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-03-57.pdf

That ruling held that teeth *whitening* treatments were not
deductible medical expenses. Now, if what you have are
traditional orthdontist expenses (braces to straighten out
teeth that represents a "deformity" under the IRC) that
ruling shouldn't affect you. But the ruling does note that
at some point there is cosmetic dentristry which would run
afoul of the limitations of IRC Section 213(d)(9)(A) on
cosmetic procedures.

--
Ed Zollars, CPA
Phoenix, Arizona

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Tripp Knightly wrote:

- quote -

News to me!
My FSA reimbursed for my older son's orthodontics and is
about to do the same for my younger son's orthodontics.

I had one inquiry from the FSA for 2002. They thought one
dental procedure for my mistress should have been covered
by my dental insurance. One phone call and one fax was all
that was needed to resolve the situation.

Dick

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

I recently had a flex spending account reimbursement for an
orthodontic treatment rejected - reason being that such
treatment must be "medically necessary". Previously my FSA
provider has reimbursed all prior such payments. Has
something changed w/ the new tax laws?

As I understand it, guidance for FSA deductibility follows
general rules for medical / dental deductability.

Per p.4 of publication 502 ("Medical and Dental Expenses",
for tax year 2002):

------
Dental Treatment

You can include in medical expenses the amounts you pay for
dental treatment. This includes fees paid to dentists for
You can include in medical expenses fees you pay for
X-rays, fillings, braces, extractions, dentures, etc.
------

There is no stipulation as to medical necessity. I might
grant that elective orthodontics are similar in principle to
hair transplants or cosmetic surgery, both of which are
expressly disallowed in the sam pub, but the only mention of
ortho is in above section. Interestingly, it seems like most
FSA providers expressly tell you that "teeth whitening"
won't qualify - though based on above I'd think it should as
well.

Barring someone showing how things have changed, shouldn't I
conclude that my FSA provider's decision is therefore wrong?

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->