Breast Pumps: Now Tax Deductible Expense, Says IRS

WASHINGTON — The cost of breast pumps will now be considered tax-deductible medical expenses under a ruling issued by the Internal Revenue Service Thursday.

The ruling, long sought by advocates, means that women will be able to use money set aside in pretax spending accounts to buy the pumps and related equipment, which can cost several hundred dollars. For women without flexible spending accounts, the cost of pumps will be tax deductible if their total medical costs exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income.

Previously, the IRS considered breast pumps to be feeding equipment, not medical devices. However, the American Academy of Pediatrics argued that breastfeeding has many medical benefits for both mother and baby. Advocates hope that making breast pumps more affordable will enable more women to breastfeed longer.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that women breastfeed their babies for at least a year.

"Unfortunately, due to financial restraints and work demands, not all women are afforded the opportunity to nurse their children, despite the proven health benefits," the academy said in a 2009 letter to IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman that was also signed by nine other medical groups. "In order to continue to breastfeed successfully, millions of mothers working outside the house require a breast pump."

Last year, 45 members of Congress wrote the IRS to protest its classification of breast pumps. On Thursday, several issued a statement praising the new ruling. They were Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., and Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa.

"Today's decision is a huge victory for nursing mothers everywhere. Modern medicine has documented numerous health benefits linked to breastfeeding, including a reduced risk of illness in infants and a reduced risk of cancer in mothers," the lawmakers said in a statement. "And because breastfeeding is so effective in preventing disease, it also happens to save billions in health care costs."

Comments

[phill273]

11:51 PM on 02/22/2011

The IRS needs to go. Lets just put in a national sales tax and get it over with.

[Ellie Vokes]

11:32 PM on 02/11/2011

This tax deduction is long overdue. Breast Pumps are not a luxury and mothers who chose to breast feed, or are thinking of doing so, are now given an extra incentive.

[riles52]

12:16 PM on 02/11/2011

Question whether IRS will revisit its ruling denying formula cost to woman with double masectomy

http://riles52.blogspot.com/2011/02/from-mercenaries-to-mothers-milk.html

[sunnybunny]

08:05 AM on 02/13/2011

I think that would be a great idea as it would reinforce the concept that artificial formula is for people with a specific medical need.

[lmo913]

05:52 PM on 02/13/2011

Or for those people who need to use prescription formula (often because the allergens are also present in a mother's milk).

[intelliwoman]

11:15 AM on 02/11/2011

So, in other words, I am once again forced to pay for other people's children, either in time off or money? If you can't afford them, don't have them.

[liltruthie]

03:47 PM on 02/11/2011

Wha? How do you equate this? The ruling is about pre-tax spending accounts. Their money…not your money. For women without the pre-tax accounts, they still have to prove it exceeds 7.5 % of their income before they can get the deduction, those women who have pay tax due (consult your tax bracket) and those that don't do not and are likely less-informed on the matter of breastfeeding and it's benefits. Those that don't have the pay/money need the help, especially—and in all likelihood are being told to formula feed as they're getting WIC checks that tell 'em to pick up FORMULA vs. nurse.

Regardless, you clearly do not know how breastfeeding saves EVERYONE'S money. This isn't just about the families of children. If you have children who are healthier, the populace is healthier. Breaking it down to brass tacks, what's healthier for you…something that came from nature or from a factory? Do calves go to Kroger/chemists for their milk? Consult La Leche League International, check womenshealth.gov/breastfeeding, cdc.gov/breastfeeding, http://www.who.int/topics/breastfeeding/en/
And I'd be happy to talk with anyone about it…happily nursed my daughter until she was (gasp) four years old. :D

[lmo913]

10:19 AM on 02/12/2011

ONe of the great things about WIC is that it is really a nutrition program. As such, they actually provide Medela pumps and breastfeeding classes. They do not give out formula coupons easily.

[billyfromphilly]

07:33 AM on 02/12/2011

You're also forced to pay for record oil company profits, crony military contracts, bullshit bank bailouts, etc. If you don't like how your tax dollars are being spent, take it up with your congressperson. One of these days, you'll use a government program and I won't complain when my tax dollars pay for you.

[jetle25]

09:51 AM on 02/11/2011

My gf says the govt should pay for and monitor tampons. As nice as the IRS are doing this. Why doesn't the US have better maternity and paternity leaves. Its ridiculous. Sweden is giving up to 2 years for Maternity leave and full pay. Along with 1 year paternity leave. I also believe Britain has govt paid nannies too......The US can't even get a universal health care going

[Demgirls]

08:03 AM on 02/11/2011

If i cannot afford to feed my baby, why am i having babies with contraceptives available to include abortions? If you can't feed 'em do nit get oregnant. Is this rocket science? I paid for my thirty dollar plastic breast pump 20 years ago at the retail store and it worked just fine. Easy. Why the heck am i i subsidizing an elaborate breast pump now that pharmaceutical companies are ony gouging us for hundreds of dollars?
This is bs. My salary is frozen because we are in an economic crisis? Give them coupons for store bought pumps for heaven sakes. Whose dumb idea is this?

[lmo913]

10:09 AM on 02/12/2011

These are for store-bought breast pumps. Those coupons would be a lot more expensive than a tax break. But hey, if you think the government wants to pay the 200-300 rather than just give me a break on the taxes on that money (closer to 70), then great!

[rowdiman]

08:51 PM on 02/10/2011

This is a long time in coming.

I can't help but wonder if that ignorant politician Simpson, who made the crass remarks about Social Security and the teets... isn't relieved.

[rvtgr8]

06:50 PM on 02/10/2011

It is about time that the men over at the IRS finally figured out the importance of such devices. This is not a frivolous expense. This is about protecting infants and strengthening their immune systems. Thanks for looking at this in a progressive manner.

[Demgirls]

08:06 AM on 02/11/2011

Plastic store bought breast pumps work fine. How did our grandmothers ever survive? What, another government contract to buy your breast oump? What, next your kotex and tampons? This must be a republican idea.

[lmo913]

10:11 AM on 02/12/2011

Who is buying the breast pump? Do you have any idea how tax deductions and flexible spending accounts work? I think you are really confused about what this means. It just means that a breast pump is treated like any other medical device for tax purposes. Up until this year, I could deduct the cost of advil, but not a breast pump. There is no "government contract."

[sunnybunny]

11:27 AM on 02/14/2011

Our grandmothers weren't expected to work outside the home.