The 2010 federal budget recently announced that purely cosmetic surgery incurred after March 4, 2010 no longer qualifies as a medical expense. Previously, any payments for medical services made to a medical practitioner (such as a doctor or surgeon) or dentist qualified as medical expenses.

The Canada Revenue Agency stated these ineligible expenses include surgical and non-surgical procedures purely aimed at enhancing one's appearance. Example includes liposuction, hair replacement procedures, Botox injections and teeth whitening. These expenses will continue to qualify as a medical expense if they are necessary for medical or reconstructive purposes, such as surgery to correct a deformity related to a congenital abnormality, a personal injury or a disfiguring disease.

Immediately after the rules were changed to disallow purely cosmetic procedures, the CRA was asked if corrective laser eye surgery and dental crowns survived the cut. The CRA said both procedures continue to qualify as medical expenses.

On that note, here are some questions presented to the CRA relating to other medical-type expenses.

Are expenses incurred to grow marijuana to produce and keep marijuana for medical purposes considered to be medical expenses? The CRA's position: No. The cost to buy marijuana (under strict conditions and for medical purposes) from an authorized individual is a medical expense. The costs of marijuana seeds purchased from Health Canada also qualify. But the costs to grow those seeds are not qualifying medical expenses.

Do costs of a tanning machine or fees paid to a tanning salon qualify as a medical expense if the treatment is prescribed by a doctor for relief for psoriasis? The CRA's position: No. The tax laws do not specify the cost of a tanning machine or fees paid for its use as a medical expense.

Where the treatment is prescribed by a physician, do the costs of practising therapeutic horseback riding at a therapeutic equestrian centre for a disabled child qualify? The CRA responses: No. While the tax laws do allow for 'care and training, at a school, institution or other place," the CRA does not consider the therapeutic equestrian centre as an 'other place". Based on the rules of interpretation, it is the CRA's opinion 'other place" has to be one that is similar to a school or institution.

Where the individual is an above-the knee amputee, does the cost of a modified bicycle qualify as a medical expense on the basis it is used like a wheelchair? The CRA's position: No. The tax laws do not specify a bicycle as a qualifying piece of equipment. The CRA pored through a few dictionaries which described a wheelchair as a chair on wheel. A chair, generally speaking, allows for stationary relaxation. A bicycle does not. Therefore a bicycle is nothing close to a wheelchair and cannot be construed to be one.