19 July 1989 Income Tax Severed Letter 5-8117B

Please note that the following document, although believed to be correct at the time of issue, may not represent the current position of the CRA.
Prenez note que ce document, bien qu'exact au moment émis, peut ne pas représenter la position actuelle de l'ARC.

Please note that the following document, although believed to be correct at the time of issue, may not represent the current position of the Department. Prenez note que ce document, bien qu'exact au moment émis, peut ne pas représenter la position actuelle du ministère.

We have attached a copy of correspondence received by this Division for your consideration and discussion with the department of Finance on the interpretation of paragraph 118.2(2)(e) of the Act with respect to stop smoking programs.

The two main types of programs which have been encountered are:

• 1. programs which feature some form of medical treatments combined with instruction in life style, management and a follow-up program.
• 2. programs which provide some form of treatment to reduce the physical discomfort of tobacco withdrawal only.

As early as 1975, the department gave a favorable opinion to a stop smoking centre as it was felt that dictionary definitions of the following terms appearing in then subparagraph 110(1)(c)(vi) of the Act were broad enough to support the deductibility of these fees:

• 1. Care. “Oversight with a view to protection, preservation or guidance”. The centre provided care in that guidance was provided by the centre both during and following therapy.
• 2. Handicap. “Any encumbrance of disability that weighs upon effort”. It was recognized that it may have been stretching credibility somewhat to classify a smoking habit as a “handicap”, but it was recognized that smoking can cause some serious physical handicaps. It was considered impractical in this instance to draw distinctions between whether the handicap is the habit itself, or if it is those disabilities that are caused by the habit.

Recently this position has been applied in a stricter fashion such that the Department has offered the opinion that fees paid to a stop smokers program would not qualify as medical expenses even where attendance is prescribed by a medical practitioner to relieve a specific health problem as the program would not constitute the care or care and training of the physically or mentally handicapped as contemplated by the relevant provision. At the same time we recognized that there may be exceptional circumstances in which the costs incurred in connection with a stop smokers program that is prescribed and monitored by a medical practitioner in the treatment of an illness would qualify as medical expenses if paid to a medical practitioner.

In view of the legislative changes that have taken place recently with respect to the restriction on smoking in the work place and other areas, any comments you may have with respect to this issue would be appreciated.