20 C.F.R. § 416.1208

How funds held in financial institution accounts are counted

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

(a) General. Funds held in a financial institution account (including savings, checking, and time deposits, also known as certificates of deposit) are an individual's resource if the individual owns the account and can use the funds for his or her support and maintenance. We determine whether an individual owns the account and can use the funds for his or her support and maintenance by looking at how the individual holds the account. This is reflected in the way the account is titled.

(b) Individually-held account. If an individual is designated as sole owner by the account title and can withdraw funds and use them for his or her support and maintenance, all of the funds, regardless of their source, are that individual's resource. For as long as these conditions are met, we presume that the individual owns 100 percent of the funds in the account. This presumption is non-rebuttable.

(c) Jointly-held account—(1) Account holders include one or more SSI claimants or recipients. If there is only one SSI claimant or recipient account holder on a jointly held account, we presume that all of the funds in the account belong to that individual. If there is more than one claimant or recipient account holder, we presume that all the funds in the account belong to those individuals in equal shares.

(2) Account holders include one or more deemors. If none of the account holders is a claimant or recipient, we presume that all of the funds in a jointly-held account belong to the deemor(s), in equal shares if there is more than one deemor. A deemor is a person whose income and resources are required to be considered when determining eligibility and computing the SSI benefit for an eligible individual (see §§ 416.1160 and 416.1202).

(3) Right to rebut presumption of ownership. If the claimant, recipient, or deemor objects or disagrees with an ownership presumption as described in paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this section, we give the individual the opportunity to rebut the presumption. Rebuttal is a procedure as described in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, which permits an individual to furnish evidence and establish that some or all of the funds in a jointly-held account do not belong to him or her. Successful rebuttal establishes that the individual does not own some or all of the funds. The effect of successful rebuttal may be retroactive as well as prospective.

Example:The recipient's first month of eligibility is January 1993. In May 1993 the recipient successfully establishes that none of the funds in a 5-year-old jointly-held account belong to her. We do not count any of the funds as resources for the months of January 1993 and continuing.

(4) Procedure for rebuttal. To rebut an ownership presumption as described in paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this section, the individual must:

(i) Submit his/her statement, along with corroborating statements from other account holders, regarding who owns the funds in the joint account, why there is a joint account, who has made deposits to and withdrawals from the account, and how withdrawals have been spent;

(ii) Submit account records showing deposits, withdrawals, and interest (if any) in the months for which ownership of funds is at issue; and

(iii) Correct the account title to show that the individual is no longer a co-owner if the individual owns none of the funds; or, if the individual owns only a portion of the funds, separate the funds owned by the other account holder(s) from his/her own funds and correct the account title on the individual's own funds to show they are solely-owned by the individual.

[59 FR 27989, May 31, 1994]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2010–2022 · leading case: Hong Xun v. Carolyn Colvin, 651 F. App'x 658 (9th Cir. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hong Xun v. Carolyn Colvin, 651 F. App'x 658 (9th Cir. 2016). · cites it 3× “20 C.F.R. § 416.1208 (b) does not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.”

Allen v. Berryhill, 333 F. Supp. 3d 1280 (N.D. Ala. 2018). · cites it 2× “215(C)(1)-(4); see also 20 C.F.R. § 416.1208 . A reasonable person could not accept the 2002 court order relied upon by the ALJ as "adequate to support" the ALJ's determination that the account was an available resource when analyzed in light of Allen's allegations and the other…”

In Re Guardianship of Anna-Marie Margaret Bazakis (Mich. Ct. App. 2022). “[20 CFR 416.1208.] Because the federal regulations expressly contemplate that an account may be held jointly with an SSI recipient, or that multiple SSI recipients might share a joint account, it stands to reason that an SSI recipient can in fact hold an account jointly with a…”

Vaserman v. Comm'r of the Soc. Sec. Admin. (E.D. Wis. 2019). “20 C.F.R. § 416.1208 (b). Thus, § 416.1208(b) creates an irrebuttable presumption that if an individual is the sole owner of an account and can withdraw the funds and use them for his support and maintenance, he owns all the funds in the account, regardless of the source of the…”

Wanda Hoon v. Nancy A. Berryhill, Acting Comm'r, Soc. Sec. Admin., 2019 DNH 045 (D.N.H. 2019). “” 20 C.F.R. § 416.1208 (a). Ownership is determined based on the title of the account.”

Lionel Embler v. Michael Astrue, 459 F. App'x 608 (9th Cir. 2011). “According to 20 C.F.R § 416.1208(c)(1), joint ownership of an account by a claimant and non-claimant creates a presumption that all funds in the joint account belong to the claimant.”

Merlene JORDAN, Appellant, v. Michael ASTRUE, 577 F. App'x 107 (3rd Cir. 2014). “” 20 C.F.R. § 416.1208 (b). Here, the bank statements submitted to the ALJ demonstrated that Jordan’s bank accounts totaled more than $2000.”

S. Toney v. DHS (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2015). “See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1208 (c) and Chapter 440.”

Simmons v. Daines, 71 A.D.3d 1322 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010). “The Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter ALJ) determined that DSS properly concluded that the $47,200 was attributable to petitioner as an asset pursuant to the nonrebuttable presumption of the applicable regulations (see 20 CFR 416.1208 [b]; see also 18 NYCRR 360-4.”

— 20 C.F.R. § 416.1208(c)(1) — 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.