Wow! That is AWESOME!!!

Can someone file for a tax deduction -- retroactively -- for their past SRS?

yes...i read it in another article that said this ruling makes it possible to file retroactively but i havent found it again...i am looking...the lady in the first article had her surgery in 2001...i am not sure if that would put her in that category or not.

Claims
 

Tax Victory For Transgender People Finalized

Early last year, a federal tax court issued a ruling which is a major victory for transgender people. The court ruled that people who undergo sex reassignment surgery may, with certain limitations, claim the cost of the surgery as a tax deductible medical expense on their federal tax return. February 7, 2011 was the deadline for the government to appeal the decision, and it did not do so. So the decision is now final and binding on the federal government. It appears now that others can claim sex reassignment surgery, and hormone therapy, as a deductible medical expense on their federal tax return assuming they have the documents to support their need for them.



The court said that, if a patient is experiencing gender identity disorder (GID), and there is a clear medical record that the surgery is needed to treat that condition, then the costs of the surgery may be deducted as a medical expense on federal income tax return. Anyone who is considering having the surgery, and claiming a tax deduction for it on their federal income tax return, should first consult with their medical provider and with their tax advisor. This decision should not be made lightly.

The court said Gender Identity Disorder (GID) is an actual disease, as defined by the Internal Revenue Code. It also said hormone therapy, and sex reassignment surgery, are valid forms of treatment for that disease, and the costs of such care are deductible under the Internal Revenue Code.

This case began when a transgender person in Massachusetts, Rhiannon O'Donnabhain, underwent sex reassignment surgery in 2001. She then claimed the cost of the procedure as a deductible medical expense on her federal tax return. But the Internal Revenue Service refused to allow the deduction. Ms. O'Donnabhain then went to court to appeal their decision.

The tax court said O'Donnabhain could claim the cost of hormone therapy and of sex reassignment surgery. It did refuse to allow a deduction for the cost of breast enhancement surgery. The court said her breast augmentation surgery was directed at improving her appearance and she had not shown that the surgery either meaningfully promoted the proper function of the body, or a treated a disease, within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code.

Last year, a contact at the California Franchise Tax Board said California law generally conforms to federal tax law and so, if the tax court decision is finalized, transgender people in California might well be permitted to claim sex reassignment surgery, and hormone therapy, costs as deductible expenses on both their federal and state income tax returns. We do not yet have a final decision from the Franchise Tax Board on the issue. However, we are currently in discussion with them. We will let you know the final outcome on this issue.

People may also be able to submit amended tax returns for prior years. It is possible to submit federal amended tax returns for the past 3 years, and amended California returns for the past 4 years. Thus, if people had their surgery prior to 2010, it might still be possible to claim the cost of the surgery as a medically deductible expense. However, you should consult a tax attorney or other qualified tax expert before trying this.

Similarly, one should not assume that any claim for sex reassignment surgery will be approved by the IRS. To succeed with such a claim, the person must have clear documentation that he or she suffers from Gender Identity Disorder and that the surgery was necessary to the treatment of the disorder. Medical verification of these facts would be necessary.

People may see a copy of the tax court decision by directing their browser to: http://www.calcomui.org/nwsflsh021511.html and then clicking on the link at the bottom of the web based version of this NewsFlash.

Read more: http://www.articlesbase.com/national...#ixzz1EL0PgF9W
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution

From joemygod
 

MA Gov. Deval Patrick Issues Executive Order Protecting Trans State Workers

Yesterday Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick "quietly" signed an executive order protecting state workers from discrimination on the basis of gender identity. Christian groups have denounced the protection as "the bathroom bill" and are screaming the usual nonsense about men in dresses stalking little girls in public restrooms.
“This Executive Order ensures that all employees in the executive branch will continue to be able to perform their duties free of discrimination,” Patrick spokesman Alex Goldstein said in a statement. Gay rights groups hailed the move yesterday as a strong “first step” in equality for transgendered people, but critics have cautioned that the bill could make state restrooms and lockers unisex. “If this indeed is a bathroom bill, if it is there’s no doubt that it will impact the public schools,” said Kris Mineau, a longtime opponent of the bill. Arline Isaacson, co-chairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus, said she’ll still work to get the legislation passed in order to ensure equal rights in the private sector. “We are deeply grateful yet again to Gov. Patrick for his solid and consistent support,” Isaacson said.

http://lezgetreal.com/2011/02/lisa-l...sgender-lives/


"If you are fortunate enough to receive the new Oprah Winfrey Network, there is a show coming up Tuesday, Feb. 22, at 10 p.m. Eastern that I urge you to watch. Please.

Lisa Ling’s Our America is doing an hour on “Transgender Lives.” I’ve spent the past ten years, as the mother of a transgender, painfully aware of the fact that LGBT ought to be written LGB and maybe T. Transgenders (and please don’t bother with comments about what everyone wants to be called) are the odd-ones-out in the LGB community. They don’t fit into any of the neat little classifications that everyone seems to have for themselves and everyone else. But they don’t fit into mainstream society either. They don’t even fit with each other most of the time, with too many variations of the medical and psychological issues.

I’m asking you to take an hour and learn a bit more about transgenderism, please. If you can’t watch it on Tuesday, or TiVo it or whatever, it will be rebroadcast on Sunday at 9 p.m. Eastern.

Thank you."

Yeah it will interesting to see how they do it.

I've been hearing people talk about this over the last few days and really wish I had the means to watch it today! Hopefully I'll be able to find it on youtube or elsewhere online!

stealth coverage...
 

BUMP!
 

Show is starting now folks!

Figured I'm not the only one who couldn't watch Transgender Lives on TV, so dropping a link I just found today. You can either stream or download the episode here: http://www.watchseries-online.com/20...der-lives.html

Pretty good, but my connection cut off and couldn't see the last 10 minutes. It was better than I expected for a mainstream-ish show.

New Documentary "Transmen"
 

"Transmen" is a documentary that follows the lives of three Tennesseans during their transition from females to males. Each transman faces his own struggles in the film, such as the availability of health insurance for surgeries and discrimination in the workplace and school, as well as coming out as transgender to their friends and family. Currently, Tennessee is the only state with a "law" that bans gender changes on birth certificates. Ohio and Idaho have policy bans that can be overturned by an executive order signed by the governor or government agency. Tennessee is the only one with a law that passed the legislature. This film is a call to action for people to become involved in lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues and lobby for legislation that will protect and serve all Tennesseans equally.

View the trailer. http://transmen.tumblr.com/


SPREAD THE WORD FAR AND WIDE!!!

A lot going on in the news lately.

The good news:

The Liberal/Left cooperates for Transgender Rights in Canada. Since New Democrat Bill Siksay (previous champion for Bill C-389) has decided to retire, some felt their hopes dashed regarding the passing of Bill C-389, a Bill that would recognise transgender rights Canada-wide by entering gender identity and expression into the Canadian Charter and Criminal Code.

But yesterday Hedy Fry of the Liberal Party of Canada has assured that she will sponsor Bill C-389 after the elections (Bill passed through 3 readings in the House of Commons and entered the Senate for a final vote, only to be stalled. Now that an election has been called, the Bill needs to start from scratch again).

http://www.xtra.ca/public/National/L...ent-10026.aspx

Bad news:

Recently been reported that a jail in the US was mistreating and even sexually assaulting its LGBT immigrant detainees. At least two transgender detainees (in two separate articles) have spoken out about the abuse they suffered at the hands of jailers.

Read more: http://www.nwherald.com/2011/04/14/c...laint/ak1z2ks/

More bad news (why is it so often bad news?): As some may have heard, a transwoman was beaten, though thankfully not killed, by two men in San Fransisco earlier this week. But seems like there was a strong reaction by the SF lgbt community. Report of the rally against violence: http://ht.ly/4BGwO

This just goes to show how far we have to go all over the world when it comes to trans rights. This shit should not be happening anymore.

This is happening in Australia. Two transmen are taking on the Government for legal recognition of their gender, AH & AB, and now have the go-ahead to go to the High Court! Until now Transmen haven't been recognised as male, nor been entitled to a gender certificate until they were physically sterile, as the possibility of Australia having a 'pregnant man' was just too much to bear :blink:

They're currently looking for financial support so I thought I'd put it out there for any Australia BFP members http://www.gofundme.com/High-Court-Challenge

Hawaii Legislature Passes Transgender Employment Protections
by Tony Wagner

"Yesterday, by a 45-4 vote, the Hawaii House concurred with the Senate on a HB 546 SD1, a bill codifying prohibitions against discrimination in employment on the basis of gender identity. The bill now heads to Governor Abercrombie, who has said he will sign it into law. Upon Governor’s signature, Hawaii will join 12 states and the District of Columbia in banning discrimination on the basis of gender identity in employment, housing and public accommodations.

HRC worked closely with Equality Hawaii to build both public and legislative support for this legislation. Through this joint effort, thousands of phone calls, emails and handwritten letters were sent to legislators urging them to approve this legislation."



:LGBTQFlag:

Outstanding!

The same bill passed Nevada's Assembly and is now going before the state Senate. The governor has also indicated he would sign it into law.

*fingers crossed*

Texas May Strip Away Transgender Marriage Rights

By JIM VERTUNO Associated Press
AUSTIN, Texas April 25, 2011 (AP)

Two years after Texas became one of the last states to allow transgendered people to use proof of their sex change to get a marriage license, Republican lawmakers are trying to roll back the clock.

Advocates for the transgendered say a proposal to bar transgendered people from getting married smacks of discrimination and would put their legally granted marriages in danger of being nullified if challenged in court.

One of the Republican sponsors of the legislation said he's simply trying to clean up the 2009 law in a state that bans same-sex marriage under the constitution.

"The Texas Constitution," Sen. Tommy Williams said, "clearly defines marriage between one man and one woman."

The legislation by Williams, of Houston, and Rep. Lois Kolkhorst, of Brenham, would prohibit county and district clerks from using a court order recognizing a sex change as documentation to get married, effectively requiring the state to recognize a 1999 state appeals court decision that said in cases of marriage, gender is assigned at birth and sticks with a person throughout their life even if they have a sex change.

Most states allow transgendered people to get married using a court order that also allows them to change their driver's license, experts said. Some advocates for the transgendered say the Texas proposal would not only prevent future transgendered marriages but also open up the possibility that any current marriage could be nullified.


"It appears the goal is to try to enshrine a really horrifying ruling and making it law in the state of Texas," said John Nechman, a Houston attorney whose law firm does work for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered community.

Gov. Rick Perry's spokesman Mark Miner said the governor never intended to allow transgendered people to get married. He said the three-word sex change provision was sneaked through on a larger piece of legislation Perry signed two years ago regarding marriage licensing rules for county and district clerks. Perry, a Republican, supports efforts to "clarify the unintended consequences" of that law, Miner said.

"The governor has always believed and advocated that marriage is between a man and a woman," Miner said.

Williams said he understands that some people's gender cannot easily be determined when they are born and they later have an operation that could change the originally assigned gender.

"It is an emotional issue," Williams said. "I can appreciate that."

But when asked about claims of discrimination, Williams insisted his goal is to simplify marriage licensing for clerks who are trying to balance the 2009 law with the 1999 Texas appeals court ruling.

"They shouldn't have to resolve these issues," Williams said. "We have confused them."

Williams' legislation has cleared a committee vote and now awaits approval by the full Senate, which is predominantly Republican. The version in the GOP-dominated House has not yet been given a hearing.

Some advocates for the transgendered say that even if the legislation is passed, transgendered people could still get marriage licenses using other state and federally-issued documents such as a drivers' license or passport. But without the weight of a court order officially recognizing their gender reassignment, they worry any legal challenge, such as a divorce or estate dispute, would nullify the marriage.


"We want to be recognized as people. We want to have the same rights as all of you," Lisa Scheps of the Transgender Education Network of Texas said at a March hearing on Williams' bill. No one testified in favor of the legislation.

Kolkhorst, who authored the 2009 law that allowed the sex change documentation to be used in getting marriage licenses, did not respond to messages left at her office seeking comment on why she now wants to take it out.

The 2009 law originally was filed without the sex change document provision, but House records show Kolkhorst put it in as part of a lengthy amendment in the last month of the session. The changed legislation passed the House and Senate and Perry signed it into law a month later.


AP
In this April 20, 2011 photo, Nikki Araguz stands in front of a monument to fallen volunteer... View Full Caption

"It would be terrible for Texas, now that it finally caught up with the rest of the country, to take a step back," said Shannon Minter, an attorney for the national Transgender Law and Policy Institute. He said most states allow marriages for people who have undergone sex reassignment surgery.

Nikki Araguz was at the Capitol last week to lobby against the legislation. Her husband, a volunteer firefighter, was killed in the line of duty in July and she is being sued by her dead husband's family over control of his $600,000 estate.

Araguz had a final sex change operation in October 2008, two months after they were married, and says her husband knew and supported her. His family argues the marriage should be voided because Araguz was born a man and same-sex marriage is not legal in Texas. A hearing is scheduled for May 13.

"This is crazy. I feel like this is a personal attack on me," Araguz told The Associated Press. "If this bill is passed, it essentially means women like myself who have had reconstructive surgery will not be allowed to marry their heterosexual partner."

Dallas County Votes to Protect Trans Rights
 

Transgender professor denied tenure, terminated
 

How horrible. Thanks for posting this story.

News release from U.S, Department of Labor:

US Department of Labor announces renewed commitment to fair treatment and equal opportunity for all of its employees
New policy statements prohibit discrimination based on gender identity and pregnancy


WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Labor today announced its full commitment to implementing equal employment opportunity policies for all department employees and applicants. The policies ensure equal protections for all employees and applicants regardless of race; color; religion; national origin; sex, including pregnancy and gender identity; age; disability, whether physical or mental; genetic information; status as a parent; sexual orientation; or other non-merit factor. New, robust statements signed by Secretary Solis include updated policies on prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex, including gender identity and pregnancy.

Secretary Solis strongly supports fair equal employment opportunity policies, and creating diversity and fairness in the workplace.

“I am expressing my personal commitment to ensure that the U.S. Department of Labor is a model workplace, free from unlawful discrimination and harassment, which fosters a work environment that fully utilizes the capabilities of every employee,” said Secretary Solis. “It is my goal that we achieve and maintain a high-quality, diverse workforce at all organizational levels throughout the department.”

The Labor Department is required to issue annual written policy statements expressing the secretary’s commitment to equal employment opportunity and a workplace free of discriminatory harassment, pursuant to 29 Code of Federal Regulations Part 1614, Federal Sector Equal Employment Opportunity, and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s Management Directive 715. The EEOC’s directive identifies minimum requirements for the policy statements.

The statements issued by Secretary Solis articulate stronger protections and establish responsibilities to ensure meaningful adherence to equal employment opportunity throughout the department. They have been disseminated to all current employees and will be disseminated to new employees during orientation as well as to employees who are promoted into supervisory ranks.

The department’s policies on equal employment opportunity and harassing conduct in the workplace can be viewed at http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/cr...ternal/eeo.htm and http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/cr...-Workplace.htm.



Read more: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/gayso...#ixzz1KsCBTWpO

http://www.care2.com/causes/civil-ri...trans-meeting/

In a White House first, trans groups have been invited to a closed-door meeting in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building to exclusively discuss federal trans-related issues. The meeting will take place Friday, April 29, and will not be open to the public.

It is expected that a federal, trans-inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) will be a topic of discussion as well as health policy as it relates to trans people, but a formal agenda has not been announced.

From The Washington Blade:

Shin Inouye, a White House spokesperson, said the meeting, which is set to take place Friday at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, will include transgender leaders who work on federal policy.

"OPE routinely holds meetings with various stakeholders to discuss various policy issues," Inouye said. "Friday's meeting, like most OPE meetings, will be closed press and off the record."
Additionally, Inouye said the meeting will be the first ever for the Office of Public Engagement where transgender issues are the sole focus of discussion.

"While transgender issues have been covered in previous OPE meetings, and transgender leaders have been included in other OPE meetings, this would be the first time OPE has held a meeting solely focused on transgender issues," Inouye said.
Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, said she plans to attend the meeting.
"This is the first president who has allowed trans people -- really allowed LGBT people -- to bring forward problems and then advocate for them," Keisling said. "In the Bush administration, we couldn't even do that. They wouldn't even listen to us. They didn't care what our problems were. In fact, they were making most of our problems."

[Read more from trans advocates over at Washington Blade.]

With the United States House of Representatives dominated by the GOP it would seem doubtful that there will be any significant moves on a federal ENDA.

As such, advocates have pressed for President Obama to issue an LGBT-inclusive executive order on workplace discrimination. This would only impact businesses contracting with the federal government and would not be as lasting as an Act of Congress but would be a good stop-gap measure until conditions are more favorable for ENDA.

Whether this possibility will be discussed during Friday's meeting is unknown, but you can read more the precedent for an executive order here.

For more on ENDA, please click here.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/27/smal....fsb/index.htm

I actually identify with the positive response that these individuals have experienced.

It took a while, but it passed the state Senate with an 11-10 vote; however, they added an amendment that employers could require appropriate workplace clothing and grooming.

Now it has to go back to the state Assembly because of the amendment.

Way to go, Nevada!

http://www.lvrj.com/news/senate-narr...8.html?ref=208

I was born and raised in Houston and spent a number of years in San Antonio too. I can ASSURE you the heat of Nevada is preferable to the heat in Texas...especially northern Nevada.

Saw that story... *shaking head*

http://www.examiner.com/lgbt-relatio...elebrity-child

On the one hand, we don't know how Shiloh feels/thinks. On the other hand, the information and resources should be out there for parents, so having someone like Chaz voicing what those resources are is good, I think. If I had a third hand (:p), I would say that I feel sorry for the children of celebrities...Shiloh shouldn't have to live in the limelight like that with the whole world wondering what Shiloh "is." It's just stupid.

NYT: Modern Love Article--May 19
 

I'm not sure where to put this, but someone may find it interesting:

A blog about what's in your pants http://www.originalplumbing.com/2011...r-not-to-pack/

Nevada's employment non-discrimination bill has been signed into law by the governor (he broke ranks with the Republicans on this one). Good job, Gov. Sandoval!

http://www.lvrj.com/news/sandoval-si...122529078.html

The man who was born a girl
 

Read an awesome article in the Mirror today that told the story and experiences of a British transman. It was cool to see that the article just told it like he said and like it was instead of making assumptions, insults or falling into the usual stereotypes.

More: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-sto...5875-23154617/

Transgender rights victory in Vermont
May 25, 2011
by taskforceblog

Congratulations to advocates in Vermont, and a special thank you to Rep. Bill Lippert and state health officials, who worked on tremendously important legislation relating to gender changes on birth certificates.

Although some other states allow gender changes without proof of surgery in their policies, Vermont becomes the very first to have clear language in its statute that makes clear surgery is not necessary to update one’s birth certificate.

It was our pleasure to provide consultation, along with GLAD, on state-of-the-art language in the statute so Vermont could modernize this law.

The trend against requiring surgery for identity documents is growing, with many states abandoning old-fashioned surgery requirements. The Department of State modernized its policy on passports in 2009. And, the policy for “Consular Reports of Birth Abroad,” which are federal birth certificates for U.S. citizens born outside of the U.S., also no longer requires proof of surgery.

A similar bill is being considered in California and advocates are working in other states as well. For many years, gender on driver’s licenses in many states has not been dependent on showing medical treatments.

What a great piece! Thanks for sharing it.