PID as an extraordinary burden

In the case in dispute, the plaintiff's partner had a chromosomal translocation. Due to this chromosomal mutation, there was a high probability that a naturally conceived joint child would suffer from severe physical or mental disabilities and may not be viable. Therefore, PGD was carried out.
PGD is a genetic diagnostic procedure for the prenatal detection of changes in the genetic material that could cause a miscarriage or stillbirth or lead to a serious illness in a child born alive. A targeted genetic analysis is carried out on the cells of an embryo created by artificial insemination before it is transferred and implanted in the uterus.

The majority of the treatments required for this concerned the plaintiff, who applied for the deduction of the corresponding costs as extraordinary expenses within the meaning of Section 33 (1) of the Income Tax Act. The FA refused to take the treatment costs into account. The tax court upheld the claim with regard to the expenses borne by the claimant herself.

The BFH confirmed the previous decision. The expenses for the claimant's treatment were inevitably incurred because the medical measures as a whole served the purpose of compensating for her partner's impaired physical function due to illness. Due to the biological connections, unlike in the case of other illnesses, medical treatment of the sick partner alone could not alleviate the illness. Therefore, the fact that the claimant herself was healthy did not prevent the expenses from being taken into account.
The fact that the claimant and her partner were not married was also irrelevant. Finally, the requirement that the treatment steps carried out complied with statutory provisions - in particular the Embryo Protection Act - was also fulfilled.