As published in
the Houston Chronicle, 50 Plus Section, on September 27, 2002
State
Retains Medicaid Technique to Help Preserve Spousal Assets
By
Wesley E. Wright and Molly Dear Abshire
_______________________________________
One of the most important techniques
utilized by Medicaid planning attorneys has recently been the subject of
national attention. Many couples
have enjoyed significant protection from seeing their life savings
unnecessarily drained by using spousal impoverishment adjustments pursuant to
federal law to expand the resources protected for the spouse at home. The technique allows the community spouse
(i.e. the spouse who will stay at home while the institutionalized spouse goes
into the nursing home) to preserve assets in many cases far beyond the $89,280
ceiling allowed at the initial caseworker level at the Texas Department of
Human Services. If the couple have
assets that exceed the cap then the excess assets have to be dealt with in some
manner. Sometimes the assets are
unnecessarily dissipated on the cost of care at the nursing home where the
assets could have otherwise been preserved.
If the community spouse lacks the income
to arrive at the amount of the Minimum Monthly Maintenance Needs Allowance
(MMMNA), currently $2,232 per month, as set by the federal government, then
additional assets may be preserved for the community spouse to generate
interest income to help the person reach the MMMNA. This method has helped thousands of spouses in the community
preserve, in some cases, large amounts of assets while still obtaining Medicaid
benefits for the institutionalized spouse. This technique is known as the Asset
first technique as assets are preserved first
to generate income rather than income being shifted from the institutionalized
spouse first.
This opportunity for asset preservation
has recently received a severe blow as a result of a United States Supreme
Court case decided this year which originated in Michigan and is known as Wisconsin
Department of Health and
Family Services v. Blumer
(122S.Ct.585). This case
challenged a states right to choose whether the respective
state would use the asset first technique, as Texas now uses, or the income
first technique. The income first approach forces the community spouse to
use the income of the institutionalized spouse first to reach the MMMNA. If there is enough income available
from that source to reach the monthly allowance then the result will be that
the community spouse will not be able to expand the protected resource
amount. The community spouse would
be forced to spend the excess assets down. If Texas chose to use this approach, thousands of Texans
would be forced to burn up large amounts of assets to qualify for nursing home
benefits.
Example, if a couple has $500,000 in
countable resources, the community spouse has $1,000 in Social Security and the
institutionalized spouse has $1,000 in Social Security, under current Texas
policy, the community spouse would be able to keep his or her $1,000 in Social
Security, protect all of the $500,000 in assets and still receive some of the
institutionalized spouses income. But in an income first scenario the community spouse would
receive his or her $1,000 Social Security, all of the institutionalized spouse=s
Social Security of $1,000, minus $60 for the personal needs of the
institutionalized spouse, and would only be able to protect approximately
$140,000 of the assets.
The income first application would severely restrict a
community spouses ability to maintain his or her lifestyle
which was the intent of the spousal impoverishment guidelines when they were
initially passed by Congress. If a
community spouse is required to burn up previously protectable assets by use of
this alternative method, what happens when the institutionalized spouse
dies? Income that the community
spouse was forced to take often evaporates with the death of that spouse and is
then no longer available to the survivor.
Now the community spouse has not only lost the income she or he was
forced to take, but worse has been forced to spend down assets that could have
been used to replace that income.
Policymakers for the Texas Department of
Human Services in Austin recently announced that they have decided not to
switch to the income first approach at this time stating that their analysis
found that it would ultimately be more costly to taxpayers. So, for now, Texas
will remain an asset first state.
Wesley
E. Wright and Molly Dear Abshire are attorneys with the firm of Wright Abshire
in Bellaire. Wright is board
certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization in Estate Planning and
Probate Law and is certified as an Elder Law Attorney by the National Elder Law
Foundation. Abshire is certified
as an Elder Law Attorney by the National Elder Law Foundation. Nothing contained in this publication
should be considered as the rendering of legal advice to any personís specific
case, but should be considered general information.
|