20 C.F.R. § 404.508

Defeat the purpose of Title II

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General. Defeat the purpose of title II, for purposes of this subpart, means defeat the purpose of benefits under this title, i.e., to deprive a person of income required for ordinary and necessary living expenses. This depends upon whether the person has an income or financial resources sufficient for more than ordinary and necessary needs, or is dependent upon all of his current benefits for such needs. An individual's ordinary and necessary expenses include:

(1) Fixed living expenses, such as food and clothing, rent, mortgage payments, utilities, maintenance, insurance (e.g., life, accident, and health insurance including premiums for supplementary medical insurance benefits under title XVIII), taxes, installment payments, etc.;

(2) Medical, hospitalization, and other similar expenses;

(3) Expenses for the support of others for whom the individual is legally responsible; and

(4) Other miscellaneous expenses which may reasonably be considered as part of the individual's standard of living.

(b) When adjustment or recovery will defeat the purpose of title II. Adjustment or recovery will defeat the purposes of title II in (but is not limited to) situations where the person from whom recovery is sought needs substantially all of his current income (including social security monthly benefits) to meet current ordinary and necessary living expenses.

[32 FR 18026, Dec. 16, 1967, as amended at 34 FR 14888, Sept. 27, 1969]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 87 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1963–2026 · leading case: Skrodzki v. Comm'r of the Soc. Sec. Admin., 693 F. App'x 29 (2d Cir. 2017).
Skrodzki v. Comm'r of the Soc. Sec. Admin., 693 F. App'x 29 (2d Cir. 2017). · cites it 5× “The district court reasoned that the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) failed to consider all the categories of “ordinary and necessary expenses” described in 20 C.F.R. § 404.508 (a) and Skrodzki’s individual standard of living.”
John M. Valley v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 427 F.3d 388 (6th Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.508 (a). “[Recovery will defeat the purposes of Title II in (but is not limited to) situations where the person from whom recovery is sought needs substantially all of his current income .”
Mick Rodysill v. Carolyn W. Colvin, 745 F.3d 947 (8th Cir. 2014). · cites it 4× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.508 (a), (b); see also id.”
Cooper v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 131 F.4th 995 (9th Cir. 2025). · cites it 4× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.508 ; see also 42 U.S.C. § 407 .”
Ermano Valente v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 733 F.2d 1037 (2d Cir. 1984). “20 C.F.R. § 404.508 . We also note that at the prior hearing, Mrs.”
Manning v. Astrue, 510 F.3d 1246 (10th Cir. 2007). “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.508 (a). To the extent that the Debt Collection Improvement Act reaches Social Security disability benefits, whose purpose is to provide income for living expenses, it certainly follows that the Act includes EAJA fees.”
Sandra L. Milton v. Patricia Roberts Harris, Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 616 F.2d 968 (7th Cir. 1980). · cites it 3× “” They specify that the existence of such a deprivation depends “upon whether the person has an income or financial resources sufficient for more than ordinary and necessary needs, or is dependent upon all of his current benefits for such needs” ( 20 C.F.R. § 404.508 (a)). They…”
Tefera v. Colvin, 61 F. Supp. 3d 207 (D. Mass. 2014). · cites it 4× “507, then the subsequent analysis of the Title II purposes and equity and good conscience factors must consider, respectively, whether the claimant “needs substantially all of [her] current income (including social security benefits) to meet current ordinary and necessary living…”
In Re Zyprexa Prods. Liab. Litig., 451 F. Supp. 2d 458 (E.D.N.Y 2006). · cites it 2× “20 C.F.R. § 404.508 . An individual’s “ordinary and necessary expenses” include: “[fjixed living expenses, such as food and clothing, rent, mortgage payments, utilities, maintenance, insurance .”
Mary COHEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis BOWEN, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., Defendant-Appellee, 837 F.2d 582 (2d Cir. 1988). · cites it 2× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.508 (b). A hearing was held before an Administrative Law Judge (AU) on the issue of whether recoupment should be waived.”
Alberto I. Banuelos v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 165 F.3d 1166 (7th Cir. 1999). · cites it 3× “20 C.F.R. § 404.508 (a). In addition, 20 C.”
Richardson v. Wright, 405 U.S. 208 (1972). · cites it 2× “See 20 CFR § 404.508 . Obviously, there is no loss to the social security fund if benefits paid to an ineligible beneficiary pending a hearing are subject to statutory waiver.”
— 20 C.F.R. § 404.508(a) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.