Med 2 tax relief for pensioner with medical card?

P

Plek Trum

Registered User
Messages
629
Hi all,
I am hoping somebody may be able to help clarify the following:

An elderly relative recently had 800euros of dental work done (crown), which was not covered on her medical card. She is 86 years of age. Can she submit a Med2 for part reimbursement of costs (crowns are covered under Med 2). She has not worked in the previous 20 years so has not paid contributions within that period.

Many thanks....
 
If they don't pay tax then a MED1/2 claim is of no use since there is no tax to reclaim. If they do then they should make the claim assuming that the work qualifies for MED2 relief. Not sure what contributions you are referring to? If you mean tax then see above; if you mean PRSI then this is irrelevant as far as I know.
 
Who paid for the work? Since 01/01/07 the relationship requirement and the excess have both been removed. If the payer has a tax liability then it is they who get the relief. If the payer has no tax liability, then as ClubMan said, there's no relief.
 
Yeah - sorry - I was assuming from the original post that the individual paid for the treatment herself but maybe this is not the case?
 
Yes, I thought as much. She paid for the work herself but as she hasn't been paying tax (obviously at her age!) then there isn't an alternative. Is it possible that her son / daughter could sumbit the Med2 and claim the tax relief for her? I don't know how legit this is (relationship requirement Graham 07 above - is this what you are referring to??). It was mentioned but I am not sure if it is a correct / legal procedure!
 
A son/daughter can only submit a claim of they paid for the treatment. Since you have said that this is not the case then such a claim would presumably be fraudulent.
 
Clarkey said:
I'm sure you could pay her the €800 and then claim the tax relief.
Click to expand...
On what basis are you sure that this is legitimate? The bill is presumably already paid by the elderly person in question so that cannot be undone. And only the person who pays the bill can claim relief.
 
If the son/daughter re-imburses the elderly person for the dental bill then they have in effect paid the bill. On what basis are you sure that this is not legitimate?

I'm sure when VHI re imburse customers for medical bills suffered then VHI and not the customer have paid the bill.
 
Clarkey said:
On what basis are you sure that this is not legitimate?
Click to expand...
On the basis that the second person has not actually paid the bill.
I'm sure when VHI re imburse customers for medical bills suffered then VHI and not the customer have paid the bill.
Click to expand...
No - where direct payment is not in place the patient pays the bills and then claims under their private health insurance policies. Such reimbursed amounts do not qualify for tax relief. I don't really understand the relevance of this though.
 
ClubMan said:
On the basis that the second person has not actually paid the bill.

No - where direct payment is not in place the patient pays the bills and then claims under their private health insurance policies. Such reimbursed amounts do not qualify for tax relief. I don't really understand the relevance of this though.
Click to expand...

When VHI re-imburse the patient they have paid the bill for that person. I never said that amounts received from VHI are tax deductable. They are in fact the opposite as they reduce the amount of the claim. VHI then claim the reimbursement amount as a tax allowable expense in their books. Same principle with someone other than VHI paying your medical bills.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top