BVA decisions by condition

Tinnitus: BVA grant rates and what wins

From 2018 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a tinnitus issue in 60,461 decisions. It granted the tinnitus issue in 41.4% of them, above the 19.9% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 25.7%, and remanded it in 22.9%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 61.7% were granted.

Decisions

60,461

2018–2026

Granted

41.4%

All conditions: 19.9%

Granted on the merits

61.7%

Granted ÷ (granted + denied)

Remanded

22.9%

Denied: 25.7%

Tinnitus outcomes by year

YearDecisionsGrantedDeniedRemanded
2018
7,389
39.9%26.1%24.7%
2019
8,979
41.0%28.3%23.6%
2020
7,144
39.6%27.4%24.7%
2021
5,281
40.3%23.0%25.4%
2022
5,942
44.1%20.9%24.5%
2023
6,535
41.5%22.3%24.6%
2024
7,938
44.0%24.7%20.5%
2025
8,094
39.1%29.8%19.9%
2026
3,159
46.2%25.9%16.0%

Evidence in granted and denied tinnitus decisions

For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the tinnitus issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Lay statement49,13764.9%34.2%+30.6 pts
Positive nexus opinion11,03277.7%57.0%+20.6 pts
Claimed as secondary3,22381.0%60.8%+20.2 pts
Buddy statement1,68877.1%61.2%+15.9 pts
Combat service5,26875.3%60.2%+15.1 pts
Favorable VA exam5,97571.5%60.4%+11.2 pts
Treating physician opinion1,60571.0%61.4%+9.5 pts
Private medical opinion16,71067.1%59.3%+7.9 pts
  • The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 83.3% of the decisions that granted tinnitus.
  • The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 77.4% of grants and 12.6% of denials.

Negative evidence in the record

An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often tinnitus was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Negative nexus opinion37,14866.9%49.7%+17.2 pts
Unfavorable VA exam46,85163.2%52.3%+10.9 pts

Why the Board granted or denied tinnitus

Most common reasons in grants

  1. In-service noise exposure conceded3,601
  2. Current diagnosis established3,467
  3. Continuity of symptomatology since service1,906
  4. Service records negative or silent364
  5. Va examiner: less likely than not related to service265
  6. Tinnitus capable of lay observation254
  7. Resolved doubt in veteran's favor208
  8. Criteria for service connection met208

Most common reasons in denials

  1. Already at the maximum schedular rating2,996
  2. Va examiner: less likely than not related to service2,548
  3. No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis1,627
  4. Service records negative or silent1,475
  5. No legal basis for a higher rating680
  6. Preponderance of the evidence against the claim617
  7. No current diagnosis466
  8. No continuity of symptomatology453

Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.

Recent tinnitus decisions

Granted

Citation Nr. A26040456Paul Sorisio · 2026

Continuity of symptomatology since service; Presumed incurred in service; Positive treating physician opinion; Inadequate VA opinion

Citation Nr. 26005120B. Mullins · 2026

Current disability with onset in service; Related to in-service noise exposure; Hazardous noise exposure conceded due to MOS; Benefit of the doubt resolved in veteran's favor

Citation Nr. A26040484Donnie R. Hachey · 2026

Veteran's credible testimony of in-service onset and continuity of tinnitus; AOJ conceded in-service acoustic noise trauma; AOJ conceded current diagnosis of tinnitus

Denied

Citation Nr. A26040474John R. Doolittle, II · 2026

Maximum schedular rating for tinnitus is 10 percent per DC 6260; Federal Circuit precedent (Smith v. Nicholson) supports single rating limit; No legal basis for rating in excess of 10 percent

Citation Nr. A26040479Michelle L. Kane · 2026

Denied as secondary to denied migraines/headaches; No current migraines/headaches established

Citation Nr. A26040507Shereen M. Marcus · 2026

Service records negative for tinnitus complaints; Veteran repeatedly denied tinnitus during examinations; Evidence persuasively weighs against service connection

Rules that apply to tinnitus claims

Research your tinnitus case

Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.

Open VA Law Explorer

How these numbers are calculated

  • Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a tinnitus issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
  • “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
  • The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2018–2026) and can contain errors. Updated automatically as new decisions are added.
  • Research aid, not legal advice. Verify each decision and regulation before relying on it.