Principal Issues: Can a Segway be a “wheelchair” under paragraph 118.2(2)(i) of the Act for the purpose of the METC?
Position: No
Reasons: No provision of the Act allows a Segway as a medical expense for the METC. The ordinary meaning of the term wheelchair could not be extended to include a Segway.
November 9, 2015
Robert Greene Income Tax Rulings Directorate
A/Director Business and Employment Division
Legislative Amendments Division George A Robertson, CPA, CMA
Legislative Policy Directorate 905-721-5196
2015-059631
Medical Expense Tax Credit
This is in response to your email of July 15, 2015, forwarding questions to us about whether the cost of certain devices are eligible medical expenses for the purpose of the medical expense tax credit (“METC”). The questions originated from a taxpayer request that the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) allow the broader terminology of “mobility devices” instead of “scooters” on the list of eligible medical expenses on the CRA website so that a Segway could qualify. The taxpayer has indicated that he has a XXXXXXXXXX disease that creates profound overall weakness after walking any great distance. A Segway would provide him with mobility and access to areas where scooters can’t go.
You have forwarded the following questions:
- Would a standing device made for persons with mobility impairments for the purposes of mobility as well as standing therapy be eligible under paragraph 5700(z.3) of the Income Tax Regulations (“Regulations”)?
- Would a standing device specifically marketed as a “standing wheelchair” be eligible under paragraph 118.2(2)(i) of the Income Tax Act (“Act”)?
- Finally, should it be determined that standing wheelchairs would be eligible as wheelchairs under paragraph 118.2(2)(i) of the Act, would a Segway (as a non-medical device) that is purchased as a substitute for a wheelchair or scooter, for an individual who requires a wheelchair due to a mobility impairment, also be allowed by the CRA under paragraph 118.2(2)(i)?
Our Comments
Paragraph 118.2(2)(i) of the Act allows as a medical expense, an amount paid for, or in respect of, various items, including a wheelchair. We have opined that “wheelchair” includes scooters and wheel-mounted geriatric chairs. However, an electric scooter is only regarded as a wheelchair if it is acquired in substitution for a conventional wheelchair and is used to improve mobility.
Standing Therapy
Paragraph 118.2(2)(m) of the Act together with paragraph 5700(z.3) of the Regulations allow, as an eligible medical expense, an amount paid for a standing device designed to be used by an individual who has a severe mobility impairment to undertake standing therapy. There is no requirement in the Act that the device be either stationary or mobile. Therefore, it is a question of fact whether a particular standing device is designed for an individual to undertake standing therapy, and the fact that it enables mobility while undertaking standing therapy would likely not disqualify it.
However, in our view, a Segway is not “designed to be used” by an individual who has a severe mobility impairment “to undertake standing therapy” and will not be eligible under paragraph 5700(z.3) of the Regulations.
Standing Wheelchair
As noted, a wheelchair is specifically listed in paragraph 118.2(2)(i) of the Act. Based on the information you provided, a standing wheelchair appears to be a medical device designed specifically for individuals with severe mobility impairments and is meant to be used as a wheelchair except that the individual is standing instead of sitting. Additionally, in the website link provided, it appears that the standing wheelchair can change from a seated wheelchair position to a standing wheelchair position. In our view, this would fall within the meaning of wheelchair in paragraph 118.2(2)(i).
Segway
As noted, we have opined that a wheelchair includes scooters and wheel-mounted geriatric chairs and that an electric scooter will only be regarded as a wheelchair if it is acquired in substitution for a conventional wheelchair. However, these devices, and standing wheelchairs, are generally designed to be used by individuals with significant mobility issues. In our view, a Segway is not sufficiently similar to a standing wheelchair to be considered a wheelchair within the ordinary meaning of the term and the cost will not be an eligible expense under paragraph 118.2(2)(i) of the Act.
As well as paragraph 5700(z.3) of the Regulations, we reviewed paragraphs 5700(i) and (m) of the Regulations to determine if a Segway might qualify under one of these provisions. However, these provisions have the requirement that the device be exclusively designed for an individual with a mobility impairment to assist the individual to walk or for a disabled individual to access different areas of a building. It is our understanding that a Segway is designed to be a general transportation device; frequent examples of Segway users are postal delivery persons and police. Therefore, a Segway is not “exclusively designed” for individuals with mobility impairments and will not qualify under the Regulations.
We trust our comments will be of assistance.
Pamela Burnley, CPA, CA
Manager
Tax Credits and Ministerial Issues
Business and Employment Division
Income Tax Rulings Directorate
Legislative Policy and Regulatory Affairs Branch