Anna R. Young v. Richard Schweiker , Secretary of Health and Human Services

Appellant seeks reversal of the decision of the district court denying restoration of her Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit levels. We affirm.

The facts are undisputed. Appellant had established her own household in a residence owned by one of her children, and paid less than fair market value in rent. The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare (now Health and Human Services) determined that the difference between the rent paid and the fair market value constituted in-kind income, and therefore reduced appellant’s SSI benefits in accordance with regulations promulgated under Title XVI of the Social Security Act (SSA), §§ 1601-1634, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1381 -1383c (1976). The reduction was limited, under the regulations, to one-third of appellant’s prior benefit level, although the rent differential was greater than that amount.

Appellant first argues that the difference between rent paid and fair market *682 value should not constitute income under 42 U.S.C. § 1382b (1976). The Ninth Circuit has already approved the Secretary’s practice of attributihg in-kind income to persons paying reduced rent. Antonioli v. Harris, 624 F.2d 78 (9th Cir. 1980). Appellant has failed to…

concurring:

Young’s main argument is that in-kind income should be imputed only to the extent that what she pays is less than the fair market value of “basic” housing. In other words, to the extent her basic housing needs are being met by her son’s generosity, Young would acknowledge the receipt of in-kind income, but to the extent that her son’s generosity exceeds her basic housing needs, she would not.

Young’s position is supported by the Secretary’s definition of income, 20 C.F.R. § 416.1102 (a) (1980). If income by definition is limited to the receipt of property which can be applied to meeting “basic needs for food, clothing and shelter,” then presumably in-kind support and maintenance income, as a subset of all income, also must be limited to the receipt of “basic needs” food, clothing, and shelter.

For example, Young is paying $140.00/mo. to live in a house with a fair market rental value of $225.00/mo. Assuming her basic shelter needs would be satisfied by a one bedroom apartment, that the fair market rental value of such would be $150.00/mo., and that she is not permitted to sublet space in her house to take advantage of the $225.00/mo. fair market rental value, then…

680 F.2d 680 Anna R. YOUNG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard SCHWEIKER * , Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee. No. 81-4065. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Feb. 8, 1982. Decided July 2, 1982. Elizabeth Hemmer, Legal Center For The Elderly And Disabled, Sacramento, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant. Alan M. Grochal, Dept. of Health and Human Services, Baltimore, Md., argued, for defendant-appellee; William B. Shubb, U. S. Atty., Sacramento, Cal., on brief. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. Before FARRIS, FERGUSON, and NELSON, Circuit Judges. NELSON, Circuit Judge: 1 Appellant seeks reversal of the decision of the district court denying restoration of her Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit levels. We affirm. 2 The facts are undisputed. Appellant had established her own household in a residence owned by one of her children, and paid less than fair market value in rent. The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare (now Health and Human Services) determined that the difference between the rent paid and the fair market value constituted in-kind income, and therefore…