Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 12, § 10-110.013
PURPOSE: Section 144.030.2(18), RSMo, provides an exemption for prescription drugs, orthopedic and prosthetic devices, numerous dental items, hearing aids, hearing aid supplies, and certain sales of over-the-counter drugs. This rule explains the sales tax law as it applies to these exemptions.
(2) Definition of Terms.
(3) Basic Application of Tax.
(C) Also exempt from sales tax are items specified in section 1862(A)(12) of the Social Security Act of 1965. Exempt items included in this class are those used in connection with the treatment, removal, or replacement of teeth or structures directly supporting teeth. Dental equipment or supplies are not exempt. The exempt items include—
made, manufactured, or fabricated from molds or impressions made by dentists of the mouths of their particular patients and sold to dentists for insertion in the patient’s mouth as the direct support of, substitution for, or part of the patient’s teeth.
(D) Sales of other specific health-related equipment and accessories are exempt from sales tax.
1. These specific items are—
more physical or mental disabilities to enable them to function more independently, the following items are also exempt:
cation devices
the use of such motor vehicles by individuals with disabilities
(4) Examples.
Purchases of over-the-counter drugs by individuals with disabilities are exempt from sales tax. IT IS UNLAWFUL TO FRAUDULENTLY CLAIM AN EXEMPTION. I CERTIFY THAT I HAVE A DISABILITY AND AM ENTITLED TO CLAIM THIS EXEMPTION OR I AM CLAIMING THIS EXEMPTION ON BEHALF OF A PERSON OR PERSONS WITH A DISABILITY.
Type of Purchase ________________________________________ Amount ________________________________________________ Type of ID ______________________________________________ ID Number _____________________________________________ Name (print) ____________________________________________ Signature _______________________________________________
(B) Examples of exempt prosthetic devices include:
postmastectomy patients
equipment required for attachment
laryngectomy or his/her larynx is permanently inoperative
part of the ear or nose
when replacing bladder function in cases of permanent urinary incontinence
apparel are not considered prosthetic devices and are subject to sales tax
(C) Examples of exempt orthopedic devices include:
such as artificial hands
to the effective use of an artificial limb
and garter belts, are not considered orthopedic devices and are subject to sales tax
(D) Examples of exempt orthopedic and prosthetic devices used in dentistry include:
1. Restorative materials.
2. Prosthetic devices and supportive materials.
3. Orthodontic devices and materials.
(E) Sales of other specific health-related equipment and accessories are exempt from sales tax.
1. These specific items are—
ing parts;
more physical or mental disabilities to enable them to function more independently, the following items are also exempt:
cation devices;
the use of such motor vehicles by individuals with disabilities;
AUTHORITY: section 144.270, RSMo 2016.* Original rule filed Sept. 29, 1999, effective April 30, 2000. Amended: Filed Aug. 18, 2025, effective Feb. 28, 2026. *Original authority: 144.270, RSMo 1939, amended 1941, 1943, 1945, 1947, 1955, 1961, 2008. EBI Medical Systems, Inc. v. Director of Revenue (AHC 1997). The taxpayer manufactured and sold osteogenic (bone) stimulators. The devices provided small amounts of electrical current that stimulate the bone to promote growth and healing, and were available by prescription only. The taxpayer argued the stimulators were exempt from taxation under section 144.030.2(18), RSMo, using three alternative theories: (1) as a prosthetic device, (2) as an orthopedic device, and (3) as a prescription drug. The Commission found the stimulator was an orthopedic device, but not a prosthetic device nor a prescription drug. The stimulators qualified as orthopedic devices under Regulation 12 CSR 10- 3.852(3) that defines orthopedic devices to include orthotics. The Commission defined orthotics as “an orthopedic appliance or apparatus used to support, align, prevent, or correct deformities or to improve the function of movable parts of the body.” The Commission concluded the stimulator promotes bone growth to correct deformities, and therefore, was an orthotic and an orthopedic device. The Social Security Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. Section 1395x(s)(8), defines prosthetic devices as devices “which replace all or part of an internal body organ.” Since the stimulators do not “replace all or part of the function of a permanently inoperative or malfunctioning internal body organ,” the stimulators were not prosthetic devices. The federal definition of “Prescription drug,” set forth in 21 U.S.C.A. Section 321(g)(1), specifically excludes devices or their component parts or accessories. The Commission found the stimulator was a device, and therefore, by definition, was not a prescription drug. Red Line Medical Supply, Inc. v. Director of Revenue (AHC 1995). This case involved a taxpayer engaged in the business of selling medical supplies at retail. The taxpayer stated its belief that enteral nutrients were “prosthetic devices” under Title XVIII of the Social Security Act of 1965 and, therefore, its sales of the nutrients were exempt from Missouri sales/use tax. The Commission found that the federal statutes were interpreted in part by the Carriers Manual and, therefore, could be utilized in determining whether enteral nutrients were prosthetic devices. It further found, however, that the manual did not define enteral nutrients as prosthetic devices. The Commission also found that under Missouri case law, Medic House, Inc. v. Director of Revenue, 799 S.W.2d 81 (Mo. banc 1990), in order for enteral nutrients to qualify as “prosthetic devices,” they must “(1) ‘replace all or part of an internal body organ’ and (2) be ‘medically required.’” Applying the facts to the case, the Commission found that enteral nutrients were not prosthetic devices and, therefore, taxpayer should have collected and remitted Missouri sales taxes on its sales of enteral nutrients. Four Rivers Home Health Care, Inc. v. Director of Revenue (AHC 1992). Taxpayer sold oxygen for medicinal use and also sold durable medical equipment. Taxpayer did not collect or remit sales tax on either oxygen or durable medical equipment because it considered both to be exempt pursuant to 144.030.2(18), RSMo. Taxpayer sold oxygen only upon a physician’s prescription; but taxpayer did not have a licensed pharmacist on the premises. Taxpayer also sold wheelchairs, motorized three-wheel vehicles, crutches, walkers, canes, commode chairs, pressure pads and cushions, seat lift chairs and patient lifts, arm slings, flow meters, oxygen regulators and intermittent partial pressure breathing apparatus. The Commission found that oxygen was a drug. However, it is not designated as a prescription drug. The Missouri Supreme Court has ruled that the sales tax exemption does not apply to this oxygen since persons other than a licensed pharmacist dispense it. Medic House, Inc. v. Director of Revenue, 799 S.W.2d 81 (Mo. banc 1990). The Commission found that a prosthetic device physically replaces a missing organ. A device that accommodates the absence of an organ or supplements the impaired function of an organ is not a prosthetic device. The listed durable medical equipment did not replace a missing organ and were not prosthetic devices. The Commission also found that orthopedic devices are defined in 42 U.S.C.1395x(s)(9). Leg, arm, back, and neck braces, and artificial legs, arms, and eyes, including replacements, are exempt if required by a change in the patient’s physical condition. The durable medical equipment items sold by taxpayer were not artificial limbs or braces. These items are not exempt under section 144.030.2(18), RSMo.