# Acupuncture in 2007 - Applicable for tax back?



## leex (15 Jan 2008)

Can one include acupuncture fees paid in 2007 on MED1 form? I don't see it listed as a treatment that can or cannot be claimed for on revenue.ie


----------



## ClubMan (15 Jan 2008)

Did a _GP_/doctor prescribe it? If not then I believe that you cannot claim for it.


----------



## leex (15 Jan 2008)

It was verbally recommended by GP. Don't know if that qualifies as a prescription. I'm sure we could get it in writing.


----------



## ClubMan (15 Jan 2008)

I would be inclined to ask _Revenue _if in doubt.


----------



## leex (16 Jan 2008)

Emailed revenue and the response was "You May Claim acupuncture as long as it is recommend by a doctor". It was originally verbally recommended by GP. Have requested a letter from them stating this.


----------



## ClubMan (16 Jan 2008)

Bear in mind that if _Revenue _are wrong here (and they can  be and have been in the past in my experience!) then claiming by mistake based on their feedback will not be taken as a legitimate excuse for making an incorrect claim.


----------



## Ham Slicer (16 Jan 2008)

Claim it.


----------



## leex (16 Jan 2008)

I have an email from them which I will make sure to keep outlining that it can be claimed. Should cover me if they come back on it.

(Before I received reply to my email today I phoned them and received same answer)


----------



## ClubMan (16 Jan 2008)

leex said:


> I have an email from them which I will make sure to keep outlining that it can be claimed. Should cover me if they come back on it.


It won't if they are wrong and you claim mistakenly. Just mentioning this again because a lot of people assume that information directly from _Revenue _indemnifies them against making incorrect or false claims. It doesn't.


----------



## z103 (16 Jan 2008)

> It won't if they are wrong and you claim mistakenly.



Where can you get correct information about such matters?


----------



## ClubMan (16 Jan 2008)

From a professional tax advisor.


----------



## europhile (16 Jan 2008)

My acupuncturist gave me all my receipts for last year for Revenue and I wasn't sent to him by a doctor.


----------



## z103 (16 Jan 2008)

> From a professional tax advisor.


So you have to pay someone to comply?
Don't revenue employ professional tax advisors?


----------



## leex (16 Jan 2008)

Hi Clubman - I appreciate fully what you're saying.

What's the purpose of people working in Revenue PAYE office and providing an advice service to private PAYE individuals if we still have to go afterwards and hire a professional tax adviser to claim back legitimate medical expenses. It's no wonder the country is heading the way it is if this is the case!


----------



## ClubMan (16 Jan 2008)

europhile said:


> My acupuncturist gave me all my receipts for last year for Revenue and I wasn't sent to him by a doctor.



Just because somebody gives you receipts doesn't necessarily mean that you can claim relief!


----------



## europhile (16 Jan 2008)

It was merely an aside.


----------



## ClubMan (16 Jan 2008)

leghorn said:


> So you have to pay someone to comply?
> Don't revenue employ professional tax advisors?


No to advise the public - no. They give out information to the public but there is no guarantee about accuracy or quality (and I and others have received incorrect information in the past) and making a mistaken filing/claim/return/payment based on incorrect information that they give you in no way mitigates the mistake or any repercussions that may arise.



leex said:


> Hi Clubman - I appreciate fully what you're saying.
> 
> What's the purpose of people working in Revenue PAYE office and providing an advice service to private PAYE individuals if we still have to go afterwards and hire a professional tax adviser to claim back legitimate medical expenses. It's no wonder the country is heading the way it is if this is the case!


An information service is not the same as an advice service. Some issues are fairly clear and need no advice over and above the relevant basic information. Some are not so clear (e.g. what specific expenses qualify for _MED1 _relief) and may require independent advice.


----------



## z103 (16 Jan 2008)

> No to advise the public - no. They give out information to the public but there is no guarantee about accuracy or quality (and I and others have received incorrect information in the past) and making a mistaken filing/claim/return/payment based on incorrect information that they give you in no way mitigates the mistake or any repercussions that may arise.



If they are not qualified to give out this information, then they shouldn't. Either get rid of the people manning these  (apparently useless) help desks, or employ professional tax advisors so they are accountable.

Giving false information is far worse than not giving any information at all.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (16 Jan 2008)

IT 6 says:



> The following, where *prescribed by a doctor*, qualify for medical expenses relief:
> 
> Drugs and Medicines
> Diagnostic procedures
> ...



I don't think that they are further defined anywhere. The Medicines Board does not regard homeopathy as medicine or drugs, but if your doctor prescribes them, I would imagine you could claim them. 

I would also think that you could claim acupuncture to be "similar to physiotherapy"


The Revenue does not require you get Counsel's Opinion or a professional advisor's opinion before making a claim on Med 1. It seems that the OP has done enough to make a claim. If the tax official dealing with the claim rejects it, then you could appeal it. 

Leghorn said


> If they are not qualified to give out this information, then they shouldn't. Either get rid of the people manning these (apparently useless) help desks, or employ professional tax advisors so they are accountable.
> 
> Giving false information is far worse than not giving any information at all.



The Revenue information service is excellent. Most of the questions they get are routine and they escalate the difficult technical ones.  I am sure that they get things wrong from time to time. We all do. 

Brendan


----------



## ClubMan (16 Jan 2008)

Fair enough. My point about not depending on *information *dispensed by _Revenue _as authoritative, accurate and comprehensive *advice *in the general case stands. If in doubt get professional advice.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (16 Jan 2008)

I see the distinction you are making. 

They do give information and not advice. I remember asking a very helpful Revenue official some question which he considered inappropriate as  he considered  that I was asking him for tax planning advice as distinct from information. 

Brendan


----------



## z103 (17 Jan 2008)

The vast majority of people will be acting on the information they get from the revenue.


----------



## leex (18 Jan 2008)

Vast majority of people won't be reading this site and will go ahead with what they hear from the revenue "information provider".


----------



## webtax (18 Jan 2008)

leghorn said:


> If they are not qualified to give out this information, then they shouldn't. Either get rid of the people manning these  (apparently useless) help desks, or employ professional tax advisors so they are accountable.
> 
> Giving false information is far worse than not giving any information at all.



Tax legislation is very detailed & complicated and you cannot expect the people manning the help desks to have a perfect understanding and knowledge of it (especially if they have not built up many years experience). They will provide information and do their best to be helpful, but ultimately you are responsible for your own taxes. 

The revenue are obviously going to reserve the right to have a tax issue decided on by an inspector (or the courts) and not be bound by information given at a lower level in their organisation over the phone.

Employing professional tax advisors would be an additional cost for the government, instead of a cost for the people who need the tax advice (as is presently the case).


----------



## Me&mi (18 Jan 2008)

webtax said:


> Tax legislation is very detailed & complicated and you cannot expect the people manning the help desks to have a perfect understanding and knowledge of it ... but ultimately you are responsible for your own taxes.



Is it not insane that you have to hire someone privately to get INFORMATION about what tax you should pay or have rebated.  Surely you should be able to access any information you need from the revenue call-line?  Most questions I'm sure are routine but surely when more difficult questions are asked of them it is up to them to find out the answer?  I said "should" in case someone says it isn't the case!  

If you don't have the money for private advice, does that mean only the rich can access rebates etc for stuff that isn't in the usual pamphlet coz they can afford the fees?  IRONIC, eh?


----------



## ClubMan (18 Jan 2008)

See _webtax's _post. You don't have to hire somebody to get information. You hire them for interpretation and advice on certain rules. You can get raw information directly from _Revenue _or by reading the legislation (e.g. _Tax Consolidation Acts, Finance Acts _etc.) but there are no guarantees about accuracy or completeness or info distributed by _Revenue _and no indemnity if it is inaccurate or incomplete and you make an incorrect return/filing/decision based on it.


----------



## Me&mi (18 Jan 2008)

ClubMan said:


> See _webtax's _post.. You can get raw information directly from _Revenue _or by reading the legislation (e.g. _Tax Consolidation Acts, Finance Acts _etc.) but there are no guarantees about accuracy or completeness or info distributed by _Revenue _and no indemnity if it is inaccurate or incomplete and you make an incorrect return/filing/decision based on it.




I did read Webtax's post, I quoted it.  Clubman, I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying it is nuts that you can't get the interpretation and advice (which in the end for you is indeed information) from the people who are taxing you.  So only the rich can access ways to reduce tax liability because they can afford a tax "interpreter".  It's shameful.


----------



## Midsummer (18 Jan 2008)

I think if you take the common sense approach - i.e. interpret the guidelines with a bit of sense and if you have a query ring the revenue and ask them then you can't go too wrong.  If they give you a definite answer which seems reasonable then take the name for reference.  Then I would apply it to your tax return.  

Obviously if you have v. complicated taxes then employ a professional !


----------



## Iceman732 (23 Jan 2008)

There is no question here. CLAIM the *Acupuncture!!   *


Why on earth would you not claim it?? A tax adviser would laugh merrily to the bank as he charge €300 for two words.

CLAIM IT!!


----------



## kenan1 (26 Jul 2008)

Hi there,

I was audited a few weeks ago for my Med 1 and sent back all my receipts. I was then told that my Acupuncture receipts were not allowable because a medical practitioner did not carry out the Acupuncture. I argued the GP prescribed it and I was claiming under physiotherapy or similar. They were having none of it but didn't look for any money back  because the underpayment of tax was under some Revenue limit for reclaiming underpayment of Tax.

So Revenue  DO NOT ALLOW FOR ACPUNCTURE UNLESS IT IS GIVEN BY A MEDICAL PRACTITIONER.

rgds, 
K1


----------

