20 C.F.R. § 416.421

Determination of benefits; computation of prorated benefits

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

(a) In the month that you reacquire eligibility after a month or more of ineligibility (see § 416.1320(b)), your benefit will be prorated according to the number of days in the month that you are eligible beginning with the date on which you meet all eligibility requirements.

(b) In determining the amount of your benefit for a month in which benefits are to be prorated, we first compute the amount of the benefit that you would receive for the month as if proration did not apply. We then determine the date on which you meet all factors of eligibility. (The income limits must be met based on the entire month and the resource limit must be as of the first day of the month.) We then count the number of days in the month beginning with the day on which you first meet all factors of eligibility through the end of the month. We then multiply the amount of your unprorated benefit for the month by the number of days for which you are eligible for benefits and divide that figure by the number of days in the month for which your benefit is being determined. The result is the amount of the benefit that you are due for the month in which benefits are to be prorated.

[51 FR 13493, Apr. 14, 1986, as amended at 64 FR 31973, June 15, 1999]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1992–2004 · leading case: Edwards v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 113 F. App'x 83 (6th Cir. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Edwards v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 113 F. App'x 83 (6th Cir. 2004). “However, Edwards had the burden of showing that her impairments were severe, and she did not submit any evidence to show the effect that these vocational factors might have on her ability to perform the types of activities that are described in 20 C.F.R. § 416.421 (b). See id.…”

Palmer v. Sullivan, 799 F. Supp. 400 (D. Vt. 1992). · cites it 2× “1207 (a) which, together with 20 C.F.R. § 416.421 (b) is commonly known as the FOM rule, and which provides that resource evaluations for determining SSI eligibility are to be made as of the first moment of the month.”

Stevens v. Wing, 184 Misc. 2d 342 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2000). “(See, 20 CFR 416.421, 416.1902.) The Secretary compared the rationale for requiring States to prorate their request for reimbursement for the first month that SSI is afforded, and concluded that this rationale was equally applicable to requiring the States to perform…”

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.