Printer Friendly
The Free Library
19,125,530 articles and books
Member login
User name  
Password 
 
Join us Forgot password?

IRS says no to deductions for marijuana.


The Internal Revenue Service ruled that an amount paid to obtain marijuana for medical purposes is not a deductible medical expense, even if the marijuana was obtained with a prescription issued by a physician in accordance with state law.

Under Internal Revenue Code The Internal Revenue Code is the body of law that codifies all federal tax laws, including income, estate, gift, excise, alcohol, tobacco, and employment taxes. These laws constitute title 26 of the U.S. Code (26 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq.  section 213, medical expenses can be deducted if they exceed 7.5% of a taxpayer's adjusted gross income. Some states allow use of marijuana for medical purposes; however, the Clinton administration has publicly stated it is opposed to medical use of mariJuana even though some medical professionals believe its use eases the patient's pain and suffering.

Under revenue ruling 97-8, a taxpayer purchased marijuana and used it to treat a disease in accordance with state law. The IRS An abbreviation for the Internal Revenue Service, a federal agency charged with the responsibility of administering and enforcing internal revenue laws.  said that because marijuana was listed as a controlled substance controlled substance n. a drug which has been declared by federal or state law to be illegal for sale or use, but may be dispensed under a physician's prescription.  on schedule I of the federal Controlled Substances Act Controlled Substances Act /Con·trolled Sub·stan·ces Act/ a federal law that regulates the prescribing and dispensing of psychoactive drugs, including narcotics, hallucinogens, depressants, and stimulants.  (CSA (1) (Canadian Standards Association, Toronto, Ontario, www.csa.ca) A standards-defining organization founded in 1919. It is involved in many industries, including electronics, communications and information technology. )-- which supersedes the state's authority-it was not "legally procured" and the taxpayer could not deduct as a medical expense the amount paid to purchase it. Generally, the CSA does not permit the possession of controlled substances listed, even for medical purposes and even with a physician's prescription.

This ruling also makes obsolete a previous revenue ruling (78-325), which held that payments for laetrile laetrile (lā`ətrĭl'), name given to the chemical amygdalin, a substance derived from an extract of the kernels of many fruits, notably apricots, bitter almonds, and peaches.  for the purpose of treating cancer-related illness were deductible under section 213 when purchased and used in a locality where it was legal.

Revenue ruling 97-9 was published in Internal Revenue Bulletin 1997-9 on March 3, 1997.
COPYRIGHT 1997 American Institute of CPA's
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1997, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Publication:Journal of Accountancy
Article Type:Brief Article
Date:May 1, 1997
Words:241
Previous Article:Reminder: electronic payment deadline approaches.
Next Article:Witnesses want simpler code and better taxpayer rights.
Topics:



Related Articles
Effect of the Supreme Court's decision in INDOPCO.
The cost of commuting to work.
Rev. Rul. 96-62: a lump of coal or a nicely wrapped present?
Deductibility of limited partners' legal fees.
Deducting costs of flights on corporate jets.
Deductibility of expenditures.
Deduction or advance?
Application of two-percent floor on itemized deductions to trusts and estates.
Purchasing, leasing and developing software.
Health insurance for S corp. shareholders.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2012 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters | Submit articles