(b) The resource shall be considered in determining eligibility from the date of the transfer for the number of months the uncompensated value of the disposed of resource is divisible by the average monthly grant paid or average Medicaid payment in the state at the time of the investigation to an individual or on his or her behalf under the program for which benefits are claimed, provided that:
a. When the uncompensated value is twelve thousand dollars or less, the resource shall not be used in determining eligibility for more than twenty-four months; or
b. When the uncompensated value exceeds twelve thousand dollars, the resource shall not be used in determining eligibility for more than sixty months;
(2) The provisions of subdivision (1) of this subsection shall not apply to a transfer, other than a transfer to claimant's spouse, made prior to March 26, 1981, when the claimant furnishes convincing evidence that the uncompensated value of the disposed of resource or any part thereof is no longer possessed or owned by the person to whom the resource was transferred;
(3) Has received, or whose spouse with whom he or she is living has received, benefits to which he or she was not entitled through misrepresentation or nondisclosure of material facts or failure to report any change in status or correct information with respect to property or income as required by section 208.210 . A claimant ineligible pursuant to this subsection shall be ineligible for such period of time from the date of discovery as the family support division may deem proper; or in the case of overpayment of benefits, future benefits may be decreased, suspended or entirely withdrawn for such period of time as the division may deem proper;
(4) Owns or possesses resources in the sum of one thousand dollars or more; provided, however, that if such person is married and living with spouse, he or she, or they, individually or jointly, may own resources not to exceed two thousand dollars; and provided further, that in the case of a temporary assistance for needy families claimant, a MO HealthNet blind claimant, a MO HealthNet aged claimant, or a MO HealthNet permanent and total disability claimant, the provision of this subsection shall not apply;
(5) Prior to October 1, 1989, owns or possesses property of any kind or character, excluding amounts placed in an irrevocable prearranged funeral or burial contract under chapter 436 , or has an interest in property, of which he or she is the record or beneficial owner, the value of such property, as determined by the family support division, less encumbrances of record, exceeds twenty-nine thousand dollars, or if married and actually living together with husband or wife, if the value of his or her property, or the value of his or her interest in property, together with that of such husband and wife, exceeds such amount;
(6) In the case of temporary assistance for needy families, if the parent, stepparent, and child or children in the home owns or possesses property of any kind or character, or has an interest in property for which he or she is a record or beneficial owner, the value of such property, as determined by the family support division and as allowed by federal law or regulation, less encumbrances of record, exceeds one thousand dollars, excluding the home occupied by the claimant, amounts placed in an irrevocable prearranged funeral or burial contract under chapter 436 , one automobile which shall not exceed a value set forth by federal law or regulation and for a period not to exceed six months, such other real property which the family is making a good-faith effort to sell, if the family agrees in writing with the family support division to sell such property and from the net proceeds of the sale repay the amount of assistance received during such period. If the property has not been sold within six months, or if eligibility terminates for any other reason, the entire amount of assistance paid during such period shall be a debt due the state;
(7) In the case of MO HealthNet blind claimants, MO HealthNet aged claimants, and MO HealthNet permanent and total disability claimants, starting in fiscal year 2018, owns or possesses resources not to exceed two thousand dollars; provided, however, that if such person is married and living with spouse, he or she, or they, individually or jointly, may own resources not to exceed four thousand dollars except for medical savings accounts and independent living accounts as defined and limited under subsection 3 of section 208.146 . These resource limits shall be increased annually by one thousand dollars and two thousand dollars respectively until the sum of resources reach the amount of five thousand dollars and ten thousand dollars respectively by fiscal year 2021. Beginning in fiscal year 2022 and each successive fiscal year thereafter, the division shall measure the cost-of-living percentage increase, if any, as of the preceding July over the level as of July of the immediately preceding year of the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers or successor index published by the U.S. Department of Labor or its successor agency, and the sum of resources allowed under this subdivision shall be modified accordingly to reflect any increases in the cost-of-living, with the amount of the resource limit rounded to the nearest five cents;
(8) Is an inmate of a public institution, except as a patient in a public medical institution.
3. In determining eligibility and the amount of benefits to be granted pursuant to federally aided programs, the income and resources of a relative or other person living in the home shall be taken into account to the extent the income, resources, support and maintenance are allowed by federal law or regulation to be considered.
4. In determining eligibility and the amount of benefits to be granted pursuant to federally aided programs, the value of burial lots or any amounts placed in an irrevocable prearranged funeral or burial contract under chapter 436 shall not be taken into account or considered an asset of the burial lot owner or the beneficiary of an irrevocable prearranged funeral or funeral contract. For purposes of this section, "burial lots" means any burial space as defined in section 214.270 and any memorial, monument, marker, tombstone or letter marking a burial space. If the beneficiary, as defined in chapter 436 , of an irrevocable prearranged funeral or burial contract receives any public assistance benefits pursuant to this chapter and if the purchaser of such contract or his or her successors in interest transfer, amend, or take any other such actions regarding the contract so that any person will be entitled to a refund, such refund shall be paid to the state of Missouri with any amount in excess of the public assistance benefits provided under this chapter to be refunded by the state of Missouri to the purchaser or his or her successors. In determining eligibility and the amount of benefits to be granted under federally aided programs, the value of any life insurance policy where a seller or provider is made the beneficiary or where the life insurance policy is assigned to a seller or provider, either being in consideration for an irrevocable prearranged funeral contract under chapter 436 , shall not be taken into account or considered an asset of the beneficiary of the irrevocable prearranged funeral contract. In addition, the value of any funds, up to nine thousand nine hundred ninety-nine dollars, placed into an irrevocable personal funeral trust account, where the trustee of the irrevocable personal funeral trust account is a state or federally chartered financial institution authorized to exercise trust powers in the state of Missouri, shall not be taken into account or considered an asset of the person whose funds are so deposited if such funds are restricted to be used only for the burial, funeral, preparation of the body, or other final disposition of the person whose funds were deposited into said personal funeral trust account. No person or entity shall charge more than ten percent of the total amount deposited into a personal funeral trust in order to create or set up said personal funeral trust, and any fees charged for the maintenance of such a personal funeral trust shall not exceed three percent of the trust assets annually. Trustees may commingle funds from two or more such personal funeral trust accounts so long as accurate books and records are kept as to the value, deposits, and disbursements of each individual depositor's funds and trustees are to use the prudent investor standard as to the investment of any funds placed into a personal funeral trust. If the person whose funds are deposited into the personal funeral trust account receives any public assistance benefits pursuant to this chapter and any funds in the personal funeral trust account are, for any reason, not spent on the burial, funeral, preparation of the body, or other final disposition of the person whose funds were deposited into the trust account, such funds shall be paid to the state of Missouri with any amount in excess of the public assistance benefits provided under this chapter to be refunded by the state of Missouri to the person who received public assistance benefits or his or her successors. No contract with any cemetery, funeral establishment, or any provider or seller shall be required in regards to funds placed into a personal funeral trust account as set out in this subsection.
5. In determining the total property owned pursuant to subdivision (5) of subsection 2 of this section, or resources, of any person claiming or for whom public assistance is claimed, there shall be disregarded any life insurance policy, or prearranged funeral or burial contract, or any two or more policies or contracts, or any combination of policies and contracts, which provides for the payment of one thousand five hundred dollars or less upon the death of any of the following:
(1) A claimant or person for whom benefits are claimed; or
(2) The spouse of a claimant or person for whom benefits are claimed with whom he or she is living.
6. Beginning September 30, 1989, when determining the eligibility of institutionalized spouses, as defined in 42 U.S.C. Section 1396r-5, for medical assistance benefits as provided for in section 208.151 and 42 U.S.C. Sections 1396a, et seq., the family support division shall comply with the provisions of the federal statutes and regulations. As necessary, the division shall by rule or regulation implement the federal law and regulations which shall include but not be limited to the establishment of income and resource standards and limitations. The division shall require:
(1) That at the beginning of a period of continuous institutionalization that is expected to last for thirty days or more, the institutionalized spouse, or the community spouse, may request an assessment by the family support division of total countable resources owned by either or both spouses;
(2) That the assessed resources of the institutionalized spouse and the community spouse may be allocated so that each receives an equal share;
(3) That upon an initial eligibility determination, if the community spouse's share does not equal at least twelve thousand dollars, the institutionalized spouse may transfer to the community spouse a resource allowance to increase the community spouse's share to twelve thousand dollars;
(4) That in the determination of initial eligibility of the institutionalized spouse, no resources attributed to the community spouse shall be used in determining the eligibility of the institutionalized spouse, except to the extent that the resources attributed to the community spouse do exceed the community spouse's resource allowance as defined in 42 U.S.C. Section 1396r-5;
(5) That beginning in January, 1990, the amount specified in subdivision (3) of this subsection shall be increased by the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers between September, 1988, and the September before the calendar year involved; and
(6) That beginning the month after initial eligibility for the institutionalized spouse is determined, the resources of the community spouse shall not be considered available to the institutionalized spouse during that continuous period of institutionalization.
7. Beginning July 1, 1989, institutionalized individuals shall be ineligible for the periods required and for the reasons specified in 42 U.S.C. Section 1396p.
8. The hearings required by 42 U.S.C. Section 1396r-5 shall be conducted pursuant to the provisions of section 208.080 .
9. Beginning October 1, 1989, when determining eligibility for assistance pursuant to this chapter there shall be disregarded unless otherwise provided by federal or state statutes the home of the applicant or recipient when the home is providing shelter to the applicant or recipient, or his or her spouse or dependent child. The family support division shall establish by rule or regulation in conformance with applicable federal statutes and regulations a definition of the home and when the home shall be considered a resource that shall be considered in determining eligibility.
10. Reimbursement for services provided by an enrolled Medicaid provider to a recipient who is duly entitled to Title XIX Medicaid and Title XVIII Medicare Part B, Supplementary Medical Insurance (SMI) shall include payment in full of deductible and coinsurance amounts as determined due pursuant to the applicable provisions of federal regulations pertaining to Title XVIII Medicare Part B, except for hospital outpatient services or the applicable Title XIX cost sharing.
11. A "community spouse" is defined as being the noninstitutionalized spouse.
12. An institutionalized spouse applying for Medicaid and having a spouse living in the community shall be required, to the maximum extent permitted by law, to divert income to such community spouse to raise the community spouse's income to the level of the minimum monthly needs allowance, as described in 42 U.S.C. Section 1396r-5. Such diversion of income shall occur before the community spouse is allowed to retain assets in excess of the community spouse protected amount described in 42 U.S.C. Section 1396r-5.
--------
(RSMo 1939 § 9406, A.L. 1943 p. 950, A.L. 1949 p. 597, A.L. 1953 p. 644, A.L. 1955 p. 688, A.L. 1957 p. 694, A.L. 1959 H.B. 131, A.L. 1963 p. 377, A.L. 1965 1st Ex. Sess. p. 807, A.L. 1967 pp. 321, 323, A.L. 1969 H.B. 804, A.L. 1973 S.B. 325, A.L. 1974 S.B. 577, A.L. 1978 S.B. 596, A.L. 1981 H.B. 894, H.B. 901, A.L. 1982 H.B. 1462, A.L. 1985 H.B. 803, A.L. 1986 S.B. 463 & 629 merged with S.B. 555 & 570, A.L. 1988 S.B. 494 & 556, A.L. 1989 S.B. 203 & 270, A.L. 1998 S.B. 701, A.L. 2005 S.B. 539, A.L. 2010 H.B. 1692, et al. merged with H.B. 2290 merged with S.B. 754 merged with S.B. 842, et al. merged with S.B. 1007, A.L. 2013 H.B. 329, A.L. 2016 H.B. 1565)
CROSS REFERENCE:
Spousal impoverishment or premature placement in institutional care, protection against by compliance with section 208.010, in determination of Medicaid eligibility, 660.690
(1960) On application of individual for old age assistance where it was admitted that the applicant had turned over to his daughters certain amounts of money, the burden was upon him to show that he was indebted to such daughters and his failure to show it by convincing evidence was sufficient to authorize the denial of his application for benefits. Carlisle v. State Department of Public Health and Welfare (A.), 341 S.W.2d 617
(1962) Director of welfare acted arbitrarily in determining eligibility of claimant and failed to grant fair hearing by refusing to consider evidence as to equitable ownership of property. Claimant was not required to establish by court action that beneficial ownership of property was in another. Powers v. State Department of Public Health and Welfare (A.), 359 S.W.2d 33.
(1962) Claimant's execution of a deed of trust against his property to secure a loan for $2,000 of which $1,000 went to his daughter-in-law and balance was used to pay off claimant's prior indebtedness secured by the property and the interest payments were paid by daughter-in-law, did not render claimant ineligible for benefits. Dysart v. State Dept. of Public Health & Welfare (A.), 361 S.W.2d 347.
(1962) Director's decision that claimants were ineligible for old age assistance in that they had sold real estate in which they had one-half interest without receiving anything of value therefor was not supported where uncontradicted evidence was that claimants had been made joint tenants with their daughter to prevent daughter's divorced husband acquiring an interest therein and there was no evidence that claimants had paid anything on purchase price. Velghe v. State Dept. of Public Health and Welfare (A.), 362 S.W.2d 747.
(1964) Finding of director that applicant for old age assistance had transferred $1500 to daughter without receiving fair and valuable consideration was based upon substantial evidence and decision denying compensation was not unreasonable or arbitrary. Dunnegan v. Gallop (A.), 374 S.W.2d 407.
(1972) Finding by director of public health and welfare that transfer of life estate of 68 year old claimant in business building which was in state of disrepair and disuse and encumbered by $1,500 in back taxes for payment of $50 for each month of her life with a minimum total payment of $1,000 was made without fair and valuable consideration was arbitrary and unreasonable. Davis v. State Dept. of Public Health and Welfare (A.), S.W.2d 775.
(1973) Held, verbal promise to pay for land conveyed by deed is within statutory definition of "fair and valuable consideration." Hill v. State Dept. of Public Health & Welfare (Mo. Banc), 503 S.W.2d 6.
(1975) Evidence held not to sustain a finding that property was transferred without fair and valuable consideration. Value of undivided interest of a cotenant out of possession is not necessarily one-half of market value. Brumit v. State Department of Public Health and Welfare (Mo.), 521 S.W.2d 445.
(1985) In determining entitlement to medical assistance to pay for the cost of residential care, the director may not consider the value of the assets of a spendthrift trust where the settlor intended that the payments from the trust to his retarded son were to supplement rather than supplant benefits to which the son would otherwise be entitled. Tidrow v. Director of Mo. State Division of Family Services (Mo. App.), 688 S.W.2d 9.
