Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
In re K.S.
(Wis. Dep’t of Workforce Dev. Div. of Hearings & App. Sept. 16, 1996). ; Clearinghouse Number: 51596
Description
Bona Fide Loan Proceeds May Not Be Counted as Income or Resources for Determining AFDC Eligibility
Abstract
The Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development has adopted the
hearing examiner’s decision that the county agency
incorrectly determined that petitioner was overpaid $979 in AFDC
benefits due to bona fide loan proceeds which caused her to exceed
the asset limit. Petitioner received a loan from her parents of
$1,000, which she deposited in a bank account. Relying on the AFDC
Handbook policy, the county agency determined that client was
overpaid because the loan put her over the $1,000 asset limit.
Petitioner argued that under 45 C.F.R. § 233.20(a)(3)(iv)(B)
(effective October 1, 1995) bona fide loans may not be counted as
income or resources. Since this was a bona fide loan, it did not
affect eligibility, and there was no overpayment. Agreeing, the
hearing examiner also concluded that the AFDC Handbook provision
stating that any loan proceeds available to an AFDC recipient which
are available for current living expenses are considered available
assets is contrary to 45 C.F.R. § 233.20(a)(3)(xxi) and void
as a matter of law. Counsel notes that this appears to be the first
successful decision in Wisconsin on the issue.
