O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner
O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner 134 T.C. 34 (2010) is a case decided by the United States Tax Court. The issue for the court was whether a taxpayer who has been diagnosed with gender identity disorder can deduct sex reassignment surgery costs as necessary medical expenses under 26 U.S.C. § 213. The IRS argued that such surgery is cosmetic and not medically necessary. On Feb 2, 2010 the court ruled that O'Donnabhain should be allowed to deduct the costs of her treatment for gender-identity disorder, including sex-reassignment surgery and hormone treatments. In its decision, the court found the IRS position was "at best a superficial characterization of the circumstances" that is "thoroughly rebutted by the medical evidence".
primaryTopic
O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner
O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner 134 T.C. 34 (2010) is a case decided by the United States Tax Court. The issue for the court was whether a taxpayer who has been diagnosed with gender identity disorder can deduct sex reassignment surgery costs as necessary medical expenses under 26 U.S.C. § 213. The IRS argued that such surgery is cosmetic and not medically necessary. On Feb 2, 2010 the court ruled that O'Donnabhain should be allowed to deduct the costs of her treatment for gender-identity disorder, including sex-reassignment surgery and hormone treatments. In its decision, the court found the IRS position was "at best a superficial characterization of the circumstances" that is "thoroughly rebutted by the medical evidence".
has abstract
O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner 1 ...... tted by the medical evidence".
@en
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
Wikipage page ID
15,278,509
page length (characters) of wiki page
Wikipage revision ID
940,682,451
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
case
O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner, 134 T.C. 34
@en
citations
Concurrence
Goeke
@en
Holmes
@en
Concurrence/Dissent
Foley
@en
Gustafson
@en
concurring
Halpern
@en
date decided
2010-02-02
full name
Rhiannon O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
@en
italic title
yes
@en
JoinConcurrence
Holmes
@en
JoinConcurrence/Dissent
Wells, Foley, Vasquez, and Kroupa
@en
Wells, Vasquez, Kroupa, and Gustafson
@en
JoinMajority
Colvin, Cohen, Thornton, Marvel, Wherry, Paris, and Morrison
@en
judges
keywords
LawsApplied
majority
Gale
@en
name
O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner
@en
other source
Google Scholar
@en
Leagle
@en
LexisNexis
@en
wikiPageUsesTemplate
subject
comment
O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner 1 ...... tted by the medical evidence".
@en
label
O'Donnabhain v. Commissioner
@en