May 2025


From The Certified Elder Law Attorney's Desk:






Childhood Disability Fairness Act:

Proposed Legislative Solution for Disabled Adult Children Who Do Not Receive Supplemental Security Income Before Childhood Disability Benefits











By:

Catherine B. Read Esquire, CELA*


Blog Spotlight:



Two Very 

Different 

Cases. But 

Both Parties

Make the 

Same Mistake 








By: William W. Erhart, Esquire, CELA*









Calendar of Events



Article of Interest:






Vitamin D Might Fend Off Biological Aging




By: Dennis Thompson HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, May 27, 2025 (HealthDay News)












Quote


From The Certified Elder Law

Attorney's Desk:


Childhood Disability Fairness Act:

Proposed Legislative Solution for Disabled Adult Children Who Do Not Receive Supplemental Security Income Before Childhood Disability Benefits



By: Catherine B. Read Esquire, CELA*

Social Security Childhood Disability Benefits (formerly called Disabled Adult Child Benefits) provide monthly income to disabled adult children of parents who 1) have sufficient work record and 2) retired, became disabled, or died. The monthly Childhood Disability Benefit is meaningful: 50% of a parent’s full retirement or disability benefits, and up to 75% of the parent’s basic Social Security benefit upon the parent’s death.


Many of our clients either receive Childhood Disability Benefits themselves or have disabled children who do or someday will. The catch is, to receive Medicaid after receiving Childhood Disability Benefits, one must first receive Supplemental Security Income (“SSI”).


This trap for the unwary arises under Section 1634 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. § 1383c(c)), which currently provides an individual must receive SSI before receiving Childhood Disability Benefits before the Childhood Disability Benefit income is disregarded for Medicaid qualification.


This creates an unintended trap of making disabled persons whose parents die young, are older and retire, or who fail to apply in time, ineligible for Medicaid.


The Special Needs Alliance has crafted proposed legislation and is advocating to address that significant problem. The proposed bill closes the trap and grants equal access to Medicaid among disabled adult children receiving Childhood Disability Benefits regardless of whether the individual first received SSI.


A Primer on the Benefits and the Problem

SSI


SSI is means-tested. It is a monthly income stipend for individuals who are unable to work due to a Social Security-determined disability. In 2025, individuals can receive up to $967 per month in SSI benefits to cover their food and shelter expenses. Individuals who qualify for SSI automatically receive Medicaid. Most children with disabilities do not qualify for SSI when they are under the age of 18 because their parents’ assets and income are “deemed” to them. However, once the disabled individual attains the age of 18, the parents’ income and assets are no longer counted, and the individual can become eligible for SSI and Medicaid. In the State of Delaware, SSI recipients are automatically eligible for Medicaid.


Childhood Disability Benefit for Individuals Disabled Before Age 22


In addition to SSI and the automatic Medicaid that comes with it in the State of Delaware, the child may be eligible for Childhood Disability Benefit. The amount of Childhood Disability Benefit is linked to his or her parents’ Social Security earnings. The Childhood Disability Benefit is an insured benefit under Title II of the Social Security Act. It is one of three types of benefits collectively known as Social Security Disability Insurance benefits. An individual who becomes disabled prior to age 22 and continues to be disabled can receive the Childhood Disability Benefit when his or her parent retires or becomes disabled, or upon a parent’s death. The child can receive up to 50% of the parent’s full retirement or disability benefits and up to 75% of the parent’s basic Social Security benefit upon the parent’s death. In addition, after two years of receiving Childhood Disability Benefits, a disabled adult child can receive Medicare.

Loss of SSI …


Once a disabled adult child begins receiving the Childhood Disability Benefit, they typically lose SSI benefits because the income from the Childhood Disability Benefit exceeds the SSI benefit.



… But Not Loss of Medicaid


Section 1634 of the Social Security Act gives an important protection for disabled adult children on the theory that disabled adult children (who by definition of being “disabled” by the Social Security Administration are significantly limited in ability to work): it provides that an individual who receives SSI before receiving Childhood Disability Benefits can have his or her Childhood Disability Benefit income disregarded for Medicaid qualification.


This allows the disabled adult child to receive the higher Childhood Disability Benefit, Medicare for primary health insurance, and Medicaid as secondary health insurance to cover those services not covered by Medicare and supported living community services.


The Problem


While well-intended, the SSI-first requirement as drafted creates an unintended trap for disabled individuals who do not apply for SSI before receiving Childhood Disability Benefits. How might this happen?


One way this happens is what the Special Needs Alliance is when a child’s parent retires, becomes disabled, or dies, before the child turns 18. In these comparatively rare instances, the child never gets the chance to apply for SSI: before she turns 18, her parents’ income and assets are too high; but once she is 18, at which time normally she would be eligible for SSI because her parents’ income and assets are no longer deemed to her, she is disqualified from applying for SSI because she is already receiving Childhood Disability Benefits.


Another way this happens is when a disabled adult child simply does not apply for SSI when he otherwise could. Perhaps he lives with his parents who provide for him all his life. Then his parents retire or die. At that point he applies for and starts receiving the Childhood Disability Benefit, not realizing he should first apply for SSI in order to get and keep the Medicaid that comes with SSI. I sometimes call this the “leapfrog” lily pad concept. A person should first land on the SSI lily pad, get the SSI and automatic Medicaid, then leap to the Childhood Disability Benefit lily pad.


Special Needs Alliance’s Proposed Amendment


The Special Needs Alliance is requesting an amendment to 42 U.S.C. § 1383c to allow all disabled adult children to have their Childhood Disability Benefit income disregarded for purposes of Medicaid eligibility regardless of whether they were receiving SSI prior to receiving Childhood Disability Benefit, so long as they would have been eligible for SSI, but for the Childhood Disability Benefit income.

 

Source: https://www.specialneedsalliance.org/blog/childhood-disability-benefit-fairness-act/

 

Two Very Different Cases. 

But Both Parties Make the Same Mistake 


By: William W. Erhart, Esquire, CELA*


Here are two cases. Different courts. Different jurisdictions. Very different people. One is a United States Tax Court case where four sophisticated partnerships are seeking a charitable deduction for a conservation easement of $91 million. The other is a Delaware Superior Court case in which a SNAP recipient contested repaying a benefit overpayment of $2,341.

 

Green Valley Investors, LLC v. Comm’r, T.C. Mem. 2025-15 is a case that arose from tax returns filed in 2014 claiming charitable deductions. The deductions were based upon appraisals of real estate which could be mined for crushed stone for highway construction. Several experts were retained including geologists, mineral scientists, and commercial real estate appraisers. The report considered the highest and best use of the properties was as an aggregate quarry mine. The owners applied for a mining permit with the state of North Carolina. It was estimated that 20 million tons of usable rock were below the surface.


The reason for the donation is not set out in the case, but based upon the facts found below, one can guess why the owners donated the property to a charitable organization which holds land for preservation purposes.


The tax returns filed claimed $91 million in tax deductions. Which will be filtered down to the individual partners of Green Valley.


The IRS challenged the appraisals and denied the deductions and assessed a penalty against the taxpayers for overstating the deduction. The matter went to tax court which required the IRS to reevaluate the matter under a different standard. In February 2025, after the IRS review and applying the correct standard, the Tax Court held that the value of the is $1.1 million rather than the $91 million and sustained the imposition of substantial penalties. The reason?


The properties were too far away from any processing plants to be economically feasible. The land was used for agricultural and recreational purposes because there was no other real use for it. Since it was not economically feasible to mine, the partnerships gave it away.


The Tax Court found that the valuation overstatement was “gross” and agreed with the IRS 40% gross valuation misstatement penalty. A 20% penalty for underpayment of the tax was also imposed. The Tax Court found that development of all four separate properties for mining purposes at the same time in 2014 and 2015 “remains beyond comprehension.”


In our Delaware case the matter is much more mundane. There are no expert opinions or complex tax laws and regulations in play. The Department of Health and Social Services (“DHSS”) overpaid a Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (“SNAP”) beneficiary $2,341 worth of benefits because she did not report her increased income to DHSS. The increased income exceeded the permitted limit.


An audit performed by DHSS found that the beneficiary “failed to submit paystubs to demonstrate her income change as required by SNAP regulations.” This violated both Federal and State regulations.


Under Federal regulation, DHSS must collect any overpayment. Each adult member of the household that received the overpayment is responsible to reimburse the wrongfully paid amount. McCann-Cross v. DHSS, C.A. No.: K24A-10-001 JJC Super. Ct. (4/22/2025)


What is the common issue? Strict compliance with the law is required to receive the benefit that government may offer. If a taxpayer wants the benefit of a charitable deduction, the taxpayer must comply with the regulations. If an individual has a need and wants to obtain a benefit, the individual must comply with the rules. In neither of these cases were the petitioners, either Green Valley or McCann-Cross accused of fraud. But they were both non-compliant. While Green Valley is subject to tens of millions of dollars of penalties, I am sure Ms. McCann-Cross is hurt by having to repay $2,341 of benefits as well.


We do not advise land developers on conservation easements and charitable deductions. Neither do we have many instances of advising on SNAP benefits. But we are experts in recognizing the issues and can guide our clients to stay out of trouble.


Next month we will review what seemed like a simple case for the client, but we were able to pick up the very complex and far-reaching tax implications.

Vitamin D Might Fend Off Biological Aging


By: Dennis Thompson HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, May 27, 2025 (HealthDay News)

Vitamin D supplements might be a veritable Fountain of Youth, capable of slowing down a person’s biological aging, a new study says.



People taking daily vitamin D3 experienced less wear-and-tear on their telomeres, the protective caps of DNA code at the ends of chromosomes, researchers reported in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.


Likened to the caps at the ends of shoelaces, telomeres degrade as people get older and are used by researchers as a sign of biological age — the actual amount of aging a person has undergone, as opposed to their age based on their birthday.


The study “is the first large-scale and long-term randomized trial to show that vitamin D supplements protect telomeres and preserve telomere length,” researcher Dr. JoAnn Manson, chief of preventive medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, said in a news release.


“This is of particular interest because (the trial) had also shown benefits of vitamin D in reducing inflammation and lowering risks of selected chronic diseases of aging, such as advanced cancer and autoimmune disease,” she added.


However, researchers warn not to stock up on vitamin D tablets just yet, as the positive benefits need to be verified in other studies.


“We think these findings are promising and warrant further study, but we think that the replication will be important before changing the general guidelines for vitamin D intake,” Manson told The Washington Post.


For the study, researchers analyzed data for more than 1,000 people participating in a larger, 25,900-person clinical trial testing the benefits of vitamin D and omega 3 fatty acid supplements.

Overall, the trial randomly assigned people to take daily vitamin D3 (2,000 IU/day) or omega 3 fatty acid (1 g/day).


This study focused on a smaller group of people in the study that received regular assessments of their telomere length — at the start of the trial, and then after two and four years of taking the supplements.


Shortened telomeres are thought to decrease the stability of a person’s genetics, increasing their risk for cancer, heart disease, death and chronic illness, researchers said in background notes.


People taking vitamin D3 supplements had significantly reduced telomere shortening over four years, compared to people taking a placebo, researchers found.


However, omega 3 fatty acid supplements had no apparent effect on telomere length, results show.

“Our findings suggest that targeted vitamin D supplementation may be a promising strategy to counter a biological aging process, although further research is warranted,” lead researcher Dr. Haidong Zhu, a molecular geneticist at the Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, said in a news release.


Manson emphasized that while vitamin D supplements might benefit telomeres, they shouldn’t be considered a substitute for a healthy diet or regular exercise.


“We’ve made it very clear time and again that the focus should be on the diet and lifestyle rather than on supplementation,” she told the Post.


“However, targeted supplementation for people who have higher levels of inflammation, or a higher risk of chronic diseases clearly related to inflammation, those high-risk groups may benefit from targeted vitamin D supplementation,” Manson added.


*By the National Elder Law Foundation

Accredited by the American Bar Association


www.eaels.com

Facebook  Linkedin