TaxConnections


 

Surrogacy Fees And Taxes



Charles Woodson - Surrogate Fees And Taxes

Articles about the taxability and deductibility of surrogacy fees are rare because there are far fewer surrogacies than with conventional births. Surrogacy is a legal arrangement in which a surrogate mother, new parents and (often) a surrogacy agency enter into a binding contract. In the event of a breach of that contract, any party can be held to the terms of the agreement.

Tax Treatment for the Surrogate – The Internet contains a wide variety of opinions related to the taxability of the surrogacy fee to the surrogate mother. Some authors classify this fee as a gift; however, a U.S. Supreme Court decision (Commissioner vs. LoBue, Philip (1956, S Ct)) stated that, for tax purposes, gifts must be made out of detached or disinterested generosity. Any payment that parents make to a surrogate mother cannot reasonably be considered detached or disinterested, so surrogate fees are not gifts.

On the other hand, many surrogacy agencies advise their clients that surrogacy payments are for pain and suffering and thus are exempt under Sec 104 of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC). This section is about “compensation for injury or sickness”; however, the term “pain and suffering” does not appear anywhere in that section. Surrogacy does not meet the definition of an excludable physical injury under IRC Sec 104 such as an injury associated with a car accident, bungled surgery or other accident. Thus surrogacy fees do not fall under the compensation exclusion for injury or sickness.

IRC Sec 61 states, “Except as otherwise provided, gross income means all income from whatever source derived.” There is no exception in the code for surrogacy fees, so such fees are considered taxable income for the surrogate mother. To complicate matters, the surrogate mother is providing a personal service and thus may be subject to the self-employment (Social Security and Medicare) taxes in addition to income tax if such a fee is received in the course of business.

To be subject to Social Security taxes, the surrogacy arrangement would have to rise to the level of a trade or business. The determination of whether that is the case is dependent on the facts and circumstances of the individual surrogacy. For instance, if a surrogate has entered into such an arrangement previously or intends to do so again, the fee will likely be considered self-employment income. However, if the surrogacy is a one-time activity, an argument could be made that this act is not a business—in which case the surrogacy fee would not be subject to Social Security taxes.

If the fee is considered self-employment income, it may be offset with benefits that are available to any self-employed taxpayer, including the ability to deduct health insurance above the line rather than as an itemized deduction and the ability to make deductible contributions to a self-employed retirement plan or IRA. Although there are not many deductible business expenses in such a situation, the legal or other costs associated with drafting and executing the surrogacy contract are deductible.

A self-employment surrogacy activity would fall into the category of a specified service business for the purposes of the new, self-employed and pass-through business deduction that will be available in 2018 through 2025. Thus, provided that the surrogate mother’s return has taxable income that does not exceed $157,500 (or $315,000 if she is married and files a joint return with her spouse), she would be eligible for the new IRC Sec 199A pass-through deduction, which is equal to 20% of the net self-employment income. However, this deduction phases out at taxable incomes between $157,500 and $207,500 (or $315,000 and $415,000 if filing jointly). The income from self-employment surrogacy can be used to determine the earned income tax credit if a surrogate mother is otherwise qualified.

Unfortunately, tax novices on the Internet are creating their own interpretations of the tax code, and many of them are attempting to justify their preferences instead of instead of describing the actual rules.

As a result, many – dare we say, most – surrogate mothers are not reporting their surrogacy income. The IRS is not catching up with them because neither the parents nor the agencies are issuing 1099-MISC forms to surrogate mothers. The parents are under no obligation to issue a 1099-MISC because, for them, the payment is not related to a business. The agency, on the other hand, is a business, so if the surrogacy fee passes through it, the agency is obligated to issue a 1099-MISC.

Tax Treatment for the Parents

Surrogate mothers’ expenses are not specifically addressed in the IRC or in other regulations. Under current tax law, the only place that a surrogate fee could be deducted is as a medical expense. However, consider the following:

  • Medical deductions are allowed only for the medical care of the taxpayer and his or her spouse and dependents (IRC Sec 213(a)).
  • These expenses must be for the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or for the purpose of affecting any structure or function of the body (IRC Sec 213(a)(1)(A)).

A surrogate mother is, by definition, neither the taxpayer nor the taxpayer’s spouse, and she is typically not a dependent, either. An unborn child is also not a dependent (Cassman v. United States, 31 Fed. Cl. 121 (1994)). Thus, medical expenses paid to a surrogate mother and her unborn child do not qualify for a medical deduction.

This fee also cannot be construed as a treatment for a female taxpayer’s inability to conceive.

Thus, the new parents cannot deduct the surrogacy fee or any agency fees, legal fees, and medical expenses for the surrogate mother and unborn fetus.

Have a tax question? Contact Charles Woodson.

 

 

Chuck Woodson

Leading Expert and Fiduciary Coach to families dealing with trusts and estates. Contact me to handle all trust and estate matters seamlessly for you.

Contact Tax Advisor/Fiduciary Coach Chuck Woodson at 858.277.8780

2 thoughts on “Surrogacy Fees And Taxes

  1. A regular Tax Court decision in 2015 (Perez, 144 TC No. 4) found that the fees the donor received did not fall under section 104 as you can’t treat payments for a procedure you agreed to as damages for pain and suffering. Whether a donor is in that trade or business is an interesting question. The standards of section 162 and the Groetzinger case should be examined. Perez case can be found at https://www.ustaxcourt.gov/UstcDockInq/DocumentViewer.aspx?IndexID=6474859.

Leave a Reply

Meet Tax Experts At TaxConnections...