US SUPREME COURT TO DECIDE WHETHER INCOME FIRST RULE IS CORRECT

In 1993, Congress sought to protect a spouse living at home (CS=the Community Spouse) while the other spouse was residing in a nursing home (NHS=the Nursing Home Spouse). That protection came in the form of guaranteeing to the CS that she would be able to keep a certain minimum amount of assets (in 2002) equal to $74,820 and as much as $89,280 (called a "Community Spouse Resource Allowance" of "CSRA"). The CS is also allowed to have a monthly income of $2,232 (called a "Minimum Monthly Needs Allowance" of "MMNA"). What does a CS do who has more than the CSRA but less than the MMNA? Can the CS keep resources in excess of the CSRA to help generate monthly income so that the CS is assured of achieving a monthly income equal to the MMNA? Or, must the CS be required to accept an awarded of the income of the NHS to reach the MMNA?

Some months ago, viewers of this site were referred to case law in NY and NJ which held that a CS was required to accept the income of the NHS before being able to retain resources exceeding CSRA as the method required to attain the MMNA.

NY and NJ have ruled that its up to the state to decide how they want to deal with this issue. A Wisconsin court, on the other hand, has said that the CS is able to retain additional assets to generate the additional income and need not be required to accept the income from her NHS. That decision has been appealed to the United States Supreme Court and the court has accepted the case for decision. We will keep you posted.