The IRS has decided that breastfeeding doesn’t make the cut when it comes to our pre-tax health spending accounts. According to an article in The New York Times titled “Acne Cream? Tax-Sheltered. Breast Pump? No.” the I.R.S. believes that breast milk falls under the food category and doesn’t qualify for a tax break.
The article goes on to talk about how many mothers started breastfeeding and how acne cream is covered. The real question is why won't the I.R.S. allow a tax-break on breast pumps?
The USDA’s Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (called W.I.C.) purchased tax-free baby formula for over 2 million infants in 2009. W.I.C. spends $100 per month each on over 2 million infants.The formula companies give the W.I.C. program an 85-98% rebate on the formula that skyrockets the price of baby formula for mothers who live within an area where W.I.C. participation is high.
Let's think about all of the costs now associated with breastfeeding. How much does a breast pump go for nowadays?
So I checked out two major retailers (Target and Wal-Mart), a random shopping search in Google, and a rental site. The most expensive pump I could find cost $379.99 at Target and $203.54 at Wal-Mart. The rental site wants a $200 working deposit and $3/day for at least 7 days.
When you factor in breastfeeding accessories you're looking at about $500, but now some people want the help of a lactation consultant. The $500 rises into uncertain territory and this may answer why breastfeeding support groups keep losing in Congress.
Since when did you need someone to tell you how to get milk out of your breast when it falls freely as soon as a child latches on? I can see why the I.R.S. dithers over lactation consultant fees, but a pump costs under $500. What’s the problem?
How much tax revenue were they expecting to lose from $500 health spending accounts, whereas they already support $200 million nutrition amounts through W.I.C. per month? Either the I.R.S. needs to redo their number crunching or someone needs to inform the two agencies (I.R.S. & USDA) of a major irony.
As for the I.R.S. believing that breastfeeding has not been proven to be medically necessary. Research exists regarding breastfeeding and obesity, breastfeeding and cognitive development, breastfeeding and lower respiratory tract infection, and breastfeeding and development of allergic disease.
So I checked out two major retailers (Target and Wal-Mart), a random shopping search in Google, and a rental site. The most expensive pump I could find cost $379.99 at Target and $203.54 at Wal-Mart. The rental site wants a $200 working deposit and $3/day for at least 7 days.
When you factor in breastfeeding accessories you're looking at about $500, but now some people want the help of a lactation consultant. The $500 rises into uncertain territory and this may answer why breastfeeding support groups keep losing in Congress.
Since when did you need someone to tell you how to get milk out of your breast when it falls freely as soon as a child latches on? I can see why the I.R.S. dithers over lactation consultant fees, but a pump costs under $500. What’s the problem?
How much tax revenue were they expecting to lose from $500 health spending accounts, whereas they already support $200 million nutrition amounts through W.I.C. per month? Either the I.R.S. needs to redo their number crunching or someone needs to inform the two agencies (I.R.S. & USDA) of a major irony.
As for the I.R.S. believing that breastfeeding has not been proven to be medically necessary. Research exists regarding breastfeeding and obesity, breastfeeding and cognitive development, breastfeeding and lower respiratory tract infection, and breastfeeding and development of allergic disease.
No comments:
Post a Comment