Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Net income, or household income after deductions are applied, must be at or below the poverty line. Assets must fall below certain limits: households without a member aged 60 or older or who has a disability must have assets of $2,750 or less, and households with such a member must have assets of $4,250 or less.
Thank you. That is fascinating and exactly the sort of information I was looking for. So is it safe to say that the people who have not been discovered by these systems have just "gotten lucky"?
Pretty much. That luckiness has more to do with the systems and methods the various agencies responsible for their program implement. Some have robust teams while others are so swamped with applications, fraud detection and enforcement just can't keep up. However, since criminalizing SNAP Fraud and pursuing criminal enforcement, fraud has decreased significantly. The bulk of fraud cases are caught early on. But some can take time to develop into a criminal indictment.
Remember, as it pertains to bank accounts, banks and financial institutions are not required to hand over any details of an account without a proper legal subpoena. Although the program can identify if a person has an account anywhere that wasn't disclosed, they don't know if it's $1 balance someone forgotten about or $1 million dollar balance. Getting the specifics takes time.
Remember, as it pertains to bank accounts, banks and financial institutions are not required to hand over any details of an account without a proper legal subpoena. Although the program can identify if a person has an account anywhere that wasn't disclosed, they don't know if it's $1 balance someone forgotten about or $1 million dollar balance. Getting the specifics takes time.
This probably explains a lot of the fraud that goes on. I mean, if you are bound and determined to beat the system, it seems like you could do it pretty easily. Of course the real challenge would be any interest income that appears on 1099-INTs or 1099-DIVs and such. You'd think that the IRS would spot that income and put 2 and 2 together. But who knows.
Pretty much. That luckiness has more to do with the systems and methods the various agencies responsible for their program implement. Some have robust teams while others are so swamped with applications, fraud detection and enforcement just can't keep up. However, since criminalizing SNAP Fraud and pursuing criminal enforcement, fraud has decreased significantly. The bulk of fraud cases are caught early on. But some can take time to develop into a criminal indictment.
Remember, as it pertains to bank accounts, banks and financial institutions are not required to hand over any details of an account without a proper legal subpoena. Although the program can identify if a person has an account anywhere that wasn't disclosed, they don't know if it's $1 balance someone forgotten about or $1 million dollar balance. Getting the specifics takes time.
The applicant signs a release of information at the time of application. Thus, no subpoena would be necessary for the initial application and recertifications. I just checked my State's website, and it states the Agency has access to bank info. ?
The applicant signs a release of information at the time of application. Thus, no subpoena would be necessary for the initial application and recertifications. I just checked my State's website, and it states the Agency has access to bank info. ?
Come to think of it, I've heard this somewhere before too. Same sort of puzzle how someone could have loads in a bank account and not have SNAP find out about it. They cited this as a reason why it shouldn't be able to happen. (but apparently still does for some folks)
I'm sure government agencies have trouble finding good help these days like anyone else. They seem to just take the applicants' word for it without verifying assets, from what I've observed (granted, that observation is pretty limited).
IIRC, retirement accounts were not counted as a resource. Years ago, all of my "wealth" was in retirement accounts. I considered applying for SNAP benefits just to **** off certain people. I don't know if that policy has since changed.
Thank you. That is fascinating and exactly the sort of information I was looking for. So is it safe to say that the people who have not been discovered by these systems have just "gotten lucky"?
I can't speak to that.
But in large systems such as the IRS and MMS and state welfare agencies, there are more discrepancies than there is manpower to investigate. When you think of the IRS, they tend to focus effort on large discrepancies looking for an explanation or for evidence of fraud. They tend not to spend as much effort on a taxpayer where there is a small dollar discrepancy. And, sometimes the discrepancies are easily identified and clear-cut; say a taxpayer neglects to include income reported on a 1099 or K-1, the computer systems find that immediately and are designed to send a notice of deficiency with little human involvement (perhaps no human involvement).
They seem to just take the applicants' word for it without verifying assets, from what I've observed.
This is precisely what I have heard, from people bragging about it and making it sound like it is common knowledge and asking why I am not doing it. "Just don't tell them about it" is what I kept hearing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.