3258. TRANSFERS OF ASSETS FOR LESS THAN FAIR MARKET VALUE
3258.11 Transfers of Assets and Spousal Impoverishment Provisions.--
Under §1917(c)(2)(B) of the Act, certain transfers of assets for less
than fair market value are exempt from penalty. (See §3258.10 for a
complete discussion of those exemptions.) Among those exemptions are
transfers from an individual to a spouse, transfers from an individual
to a third party for the sole benefit of a spouse, and transfers from a
spouse to a third party for the sole benefit of the spouse.
Section 1924 of the Act sets forth the requirements for treatment of
income and resources where there is an individual in a medical
institution with a spouse still living in the community. This section of
the Act provides for apportioning income and resources between the
institutional spouse and the community spouse so that the community
spouse does not become impoverished because the individual is in a
medical institution. (See §3260 for a complete discussion of the spousal
impoverishment provisions.)
The exceptions to the transfer of assets penalties regarding
interspousal transfers and transfers to a third party for the sole
benefit of a spouse apply even under the spousal impoverishment
provisions. Thus, the institutional spouse can transfer unlimited assets
to the community spouse or to a third party for the sole benefit of the
community spouse.
When transfers between spouses are involved, the unlimited transfer
exception should have little effect on the eligibility determination,
primarily because resources belonging to both spouses are combined in
determining eligibility for the institutionalized spouse. Thus,
resources transferred to a community spouse are still be considered
available to the institutionalized spouse for eligibility purposes.
The exception for transfers to a third party for the sole benefit of the
spouse may have greater impact on eligibility because resources may
potentially be placed beyond the reach of either spouse and thus not be
counted for eligibility purposes. However, for the exception to be
applicable, the definition of what is for the sole benefit of the spouse
(see §3257) must be fully met. This definition is fairly restrictive, in
that it requires that any funds transferred be spent for the benefit of
the spouse within a time-frame actuarially commensurate with the
spouse''s life expectancy. If this requirement is not met, the exemption
is void, and a transfer to a third party may then be subject to a
transfer penalty.
Latest Articles
Elder Law Extra, 5.12.25: Weekly News Highlights
A roundup of elder law news and practice development articles culled from news sources across the nation during the week of May 6, 2025, to May 12, 2025.
Survivorship Claims are Estate Assets Subject to Medicaid Lien
The New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, affirmed a lower court's ruling denying the application of a Medicaid recipient's estate to extinguish the state Medicaid agency's lien against the estate, holding that a survivorship claim was an asset of the...
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank. Get new article and cases summaries
You have been successfully subscribed to the knowledge bank.
We're sorry, you do not qualify for the 30-day trial because you indicated that you are not an attorney or work for a law firm. If this is an error please call us at (866) 267-0947.
If you would like more information on elder law and long-term care planning go to ElderLawAnswers.com.
Experience a demo.
Schedule your 20-minute membership demo. Find out how we can help you connect with new clients.
We're sorry, you do not qualify for the 30-day demo because you indicated that you are not an attorney or work for a law firm. If this is an error please call us at (866) 267-0947.
If you would like more information on elder law and long-term care planning go to ElderLawAnswers.com.
Experience a demo.
Schedule a 20 minute membership demo. Find out how we can help you connect with new clients.