Tax Deductible Sex Changes?

[Lea]

Just my two cents .... I keep seeing elective surgery , I know a few Tgirls where it wasn't elective surgery it was a matter of being able to live as who they were it was a matter of life, I cant come close to knowing what it would be like to not do things because your body wasn't right , wait I'm incont so I guess I can know and its no fun , but even that doesn't come close anyway the girls I know couldn't do what any other girl could do like go to a public pool or go to a new doc without fear of being rejected , or seeking a life partner,or going to a gym, or things that most don't even think about I have seen friends cry them self's to sleep because they could not be them selfs and have a life like any other girl so to say it is elective surgery in every case I think is wrong what I have seen it is anything but. I cant see anyone electing to go though the pain and all the hardship. What I have seen it is anything but elective surgery and my heart goes out to the ones that cant aford it or for some other reason have to try to live with what I have seen as a half life But then again I guess you could say it is elective surgery because they can always just kill them self's there lays the choice elect for surgery or elect to die, or live as they have and most cant do that either I had one friend that couldn't live that way and I must say she she is very much missed not by the ones that Thought it was elective surgery but by the ones that knew her as a caring,kind and loving person. as I said before Just my three cents

[Bettypooh]

I will play the devil again. Perhaps it is time to get the government out of all of our choices. Make nothing deductible. All pay taxes on his or her gross income. How you spend the rest is up to you and will not cause anyone else to pay more or less taxes. If you want or need SRS and can afford it, more power to you.

I have read your other posts here and I must disagree for reasons you note yourself elsewhere. Taxing income when it is earned is counterproductive and does not promote saving, which means that banks will be short-funded and unable to give the loans large financial progress requires Why would anyone want to earn more than they need if they are going to lose more by doing that no matter what actions they otherwise take?

Taxes should be applied only at the point of spending, which encourages putting your money in the Banks while allowing you total freedom of choice as to how you spend. Single-point taxation with a single percentage rate is easy to calculate, control, and enforce. The true taxation rate automatically adjusts to the level of the taxpayer: Those with little to spend pay less overall while those with much to spend pay more since their purchases are bigger. It is equally fair to all and nobody is exempt The system we have now does none of the above

Back to the topic again "Elective" can be taken in many ways. Breast reconstruction could be seen as 'elective'- women live without breasts therefore isn't this just cosmetic too? A leg prosthesis is cosmetic- some people walk with a crutch don't they? Why give physical therapy- won't the stroke victim learn to walk on their own again eventually anyway? Shouldn't sickle-cell anemia treatment be considered elective since most people don't get it and it doesn't directly kill you? Since we're all going to die eventually, one could even argue that all medical cure is elective in nature Of course I'm just going to extremes here to make my point clearer SRS is far more than a cosmetic procedure alone, and like many other medical conditions only the ones who suffer truly know what it's like. All people deserve all the medical care they need but today things are much different and many are left suffering

In a Utopia where government would be good, efficient, and effective the ideal would be taxation only at the point of consumption with an all-encompassing free system of non-discriminatory health care for all paid for out of those taxes, similar to how public schools are supposed to work. Everybody gets an equal chance, nobody gets left out, and what could be a problem is denied the chance to become one as the whole of society overall benefits from the program. Until we get away from 'politics' and return to 'people' we will never get to the point of having a Utopia

So until then we have G.D. considered as a legitimate medical condition- why not treat it the same way all other medical conditions are treated? Just because you don't understand something or don't like it is never enough reason to disallow it.

Bettypooh

[Bettypooh]

This ruling was against the IRS by a Federal Judge I believe so it should set a presidence for all taxpayers regardless of what state they live in. You shouldn't have to move to benefit from this ruling. :-)

Hugs,

Freta

I cannot remember if it was a Federal court or a Tax Appeals Court (and I'm too lazy to look right now ), but either way the ruling applies nationally and has set the precedent for all future cases of it's sort

Bettypooh

[Luci Vaughn]

Honestly, I don't the government mixed up in my sexuality. I mean, for fucks sake, they've screwed up gay marriage enough as it is.

~Luci

[curiositykilledthecat]

is it okay if I chime in, I don't frequent this are all too often but the topic of SRS is relevant in my own little world(not for me directly, I like my twig and berries).

From what I understand there is a medicinal way to prove that someone is in fact Transexual, however it is usually done on autopsy. Now I also know there is the standard diagnosis of GID (Gender Identity Disorder). This diagnosis has to be given in the states in order for one to start hormone therapy and what not. Personally I believe there are those who are in fact trapped in the wrong body and those who are just fucked up in the head. I do believe in those where a diagnosis is made and change is recommended or encouraged that a tax credit should apply. I don't believe the government should pay for it, since the government doesn't pay for most procedures directly. The problem I foresee is how do we determine who qualifies for the tax credit. Personally I say give it to all, I mean I wasn't raised as a spoiled brat so anything I want I have to work for and I lose much of my own income now to medicine and what not. Currently I have been without one of my medications for two months because the pharmaceutical has been playing bullshit games with me.(Deny and ask for this, i respond, deny and ask for something else...three times now) If any procedure can be deemed medically neccessary by two or more doctors then it should be covered by insurance. I worked for an insurance company, they are crooks, thieves and liars. their entire mantra is to cover as little as possible. I've seen people sue the company because they deemed their chemotherapy for their cancer as elective. At the same time, you have people who are complte ass holes and want the insurance company to pay for them to go a resort for drug rehab. Fuck no, you screwed up, you pay for it, that's how life works. The key is that a procedure or condiiton must be deemed medically neccessary for the well being of the individual.

What am I trying to get at here? Well my point is that in order for the issue to be resolved in regards to transgenderism, science has to provide a tangible process for proving the medical necessity. I know there are psychological processes that must be met and I agree with those as do most of you involved in the tg community. Until the day science catches up, I do believe that a tax deduction of some sort is not a big deal. It's bad enough we have all the welfare junkies and spoiled rich bureaucrats not contributing their share, along with an entire demograph of lower mddle class demanding tax breaks they aren't entitled to. People don't grasp taxation and don't grasp how badly screwed up the system is. If someone has to pay out of pocket for a medical procedure than they can claim it now. I claimed all my prescription drugs and doctor's appointments last year and not one question was raised by the IRS. You just have to be able to back up costs and don't claim more than you spent.

I also don't equate having your body match your brain as the same as treating baldness?

[curiositykilledthecat]

Could I add that the increased taxation and increased spending by the government is counter productive to all growth markets. At some point we should stop giving people hand outs and at some point the government should learn to live within their means.

[PrincessDragonette]

I honestly don't think having any kind of tax return really helps all that much in the end. I can't say I know what the return on a 15-20k surgery would be (not counting thousands in hormones) but is it really worth all this effort? And that seems to be the only defense of this that I've seen so far. "Other medical surgeries get it (tax refund), so I think mine should" and "Think how much it will save the poor transsexual". I think this attitudes misses what is, IMO, the proper question to be asked: should any tax returns should be given for any surgeries. I'm personally in favor of the aforementioned flat sales or point-of-purchase tax.

And I do agree with Walla, there is a very real risk of the entire process being boiled down to something very narrow to save money which would leave a lot of transpeople out in the cold (including myself). On that basis alone it seems wise to say "No thanks" to any and all government aid, including tax breaks.

On the question of M.D. vs. psychologist, I'm not entirely sure the distinction is even relevant. At least some insurance providers (I realize the distinction was made in reference to tax refunds but I don't have any info on that) in US cover therapy for all sorts of "mundane" things. If therapy were tax refundable for other "problems" then it would seem logical to include therapy and treatment for transsexuals in spite of being mental instead of physical. I still revert to saying refunds are unnecessary or even dangerous, just making a point on the distinction made.

[curiositykilledthecat]

A flat tax would make the most sense, therefore it would never be implemented.

As for medical and Psychological, I only mean that I haven't encountered an insurance company that is willing to pay for SRS. I know Aetna has it listed as medically neccessary but won't pay for it. I believe that if you have an agreement on both the psychological and physiological side of medicine that the condition is infact valid then the insurance companies would have to cover treatment. As it is most insurance companies refuse to pay until sued and forced to adopt new policies. It shouldn't be this way but it is.

[PrincessDragonette]

A flat tax would make the most sense, therefore it would never be implemented.

As for medical and Psychological, I only mean that I haven't encountered an insurance company that is willing to pay for SRS. I know Aetna has it listed as medically neccessary but won't pay for it. I believe that if you have an agreement on both the psychological and physiological side of medicine that the condition is infact valid then the insurance companies would have to cover treatment. As it is most insurance companies refuse to pay until sued and forced to adopt new policies. It shouldn't be this way but it is.

Aetna only recently announced that it is valid and I'm interested to see where it goes from here with them. There was another company that announced it was a valid diagnosis and a medically necessary surgery vs. elective and the story I read (admittedly biased since it was on an LGBT news site) claimed they were going to actually cover the cost as well. The problem with GID is that there is no "true" transsexual. The variances between each person as to what they'd be willing to accept and their expectations from treatment are vast. For some, surgery really is optional, for some undesirable. For others it's not only necessary, but their life is very bleak , to the point of being suicidal without it. If insurance carriers were to start covering it, my fear would be that the diagnosis would become even more strict than it already is (requirements may be a better word) and many trans-people would be labelled as non-ideal candidates for surgery and be declined. That would not be so bad, if one could still get their letters and pay for the surgery out of pocket. But I would think any crackdown on standards would inevitably result in people trying to fit a box in their therapist's eyes to get the surgery they want/need instead of being honest, the latter being hopefully more conducive to overall health.

Overall, I agree with you and my thoughts are the result of being an anarchist and paranoid about abuse of authority . Insurance companies are corrupt, and borderline evil and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

I'm assuming that by flat tax you were referring to a flat income tax. <opinion> I think a flat sales tax would be better because it's (a)easier to track, (b)automatically fair, and (a2.0)would downsize the behemoth known as the IRS to virtually non-existant. No tax records to file for individuals reduces paper waste, drones to read the paper before it becomes waste and automatically deletes almost all tax-dodgers.</opinion> But, either option is better than what we have now, which is why you're right that it will never being implemented .

[DiaperBoyKR]

I think the fact that the government is willing to provide a tax credit for SRS and other transgender treatments is an awesome movement. Its an actual admission that these treatments are a medical necessity.

Drew, I don't think anyone is looking for a handout here. Lets be honest, treatment is still going to be as expensive as ever, given that theres not that many insurance plans that cover HRT, SRS, or anything else. It still has to be paid for. The government isn't paying for it. Its simply allowing a portion of the costs related to it to be deducted from your taxes just like any other medical related insurance.

Also, you compared gender identity to your HAIR. Frankly, I think a lot of people (including myself) would be insulted by that. Yeah, your hair, your weight, etc, are part of who you are, but your GENDER defines a huge part of who and what you are. It affects the way you think, the way you act, the way you are EXPECTED to react, what you wear, your role in society (however little we want to admit it). Being physically one gender and mentally another is one of the most psychologically disorienting, confusing, and potentially damaging issues a person could have to deal with. So, yes, I think that if a person is willing to take a stand, identify the way they feel, deal with the results and the CRAP they get from everyone around them in their daily life, then the least the government could do is not rape them as badly on their taxes.

I think anything that encourages someone to seek the treatment they need is a good thing, even if its a small one.