Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

IRS Responds - Economic Impact Payments Do Not Belong to Nursing Homes or Care Facilities

Client Alert

In response to the concerns that some nursing homes and care facilities have been taking patients' economic impact payments (“EIP”) and claiming the EIP belongs to the facility, the IRS issued a reminder that the EIP does not belong to a nursing home or care facility even if that facility receives the individual’s payments, either directly or indirectly. The EIP does not count as income or a resource in determining an individual’s eligibility for Medicaid or other federal programs for a period of 12 months from when the EIP is received. What this means: an individual’s EIP does not have to be turned over by the benefit recipient.

To support the stance that the EIP do not count as income, the IRS stated that the EIP are considered an advance refund for an individual’s 2020 taxes. Therefore, it is considered a tax return for benefit purposes. Further, the IRS points to the instructions for Form 1040 which states, “any refund you receive can't be counted as income when determining if you or anyone else is eligible for benefits or assistance, or how much you or anyone else can receive, under any federal program or under any state or local program financed in whole or in part with federal funds. These programs include Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly food stamps). In addition, when determining eligibility, the refund can't be counted as a resource for at least 12 months after you receive it.”

The Social Security Administration (“SSA”) released FAQs addressing exactly how the EIP should be handled. The SSA specifically states that the EIP belong to the beneficiary and are not a Social Security or SSI benefit. A representative payee is only responsible for managing Social Security or SSI benefits. Since an EIP is not a Social Security or SSI benefit, the representative payee should discuss the EIP with the beneficiary and allow the beneficiary to determine how it should be used. If the beneficiary determines he/she wants to use it independently, the representative payee should provide the EIP to the beneficiary. If the beneficiary asks the representative payee for assistance in how to use the EIP, the representative payee can provide that assistance outside of his/her representative payee role.

Although SSA does not have the authority to investigate or determine whether the EIP was misused, if SSA receives an allegation that the EIP was not used on behalf of the beneficiary, the SSA may decide to open an investigation into the possible misuse of the beneficiary’s Social Security or SSI benefit payments. The SSA may also remove the representative payee as no longer suitable and appoint a new representative payee.

If you need assistance in determining whether, as a representative payee, the beneficiary’s EIP was handled correctly or suspect that your loved one’s EIP was misused, please contact BMD Tax Law Attorney Tracy Albanese at tlalbanese@bmdllc.com or (330) 253-9195.


Corporate Transparency Act Effective Again

The federal judiciary has issued multiple rulings on the enforceability of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), which took effect on January 1, 2024. Previously, enforcement was halted nationwide due to litigation in Smith v. U.S. Department of the Treasury. However, on February 18th, the court lifted the stay, reinstating the CTA’s reporting requirements. Non-exempt entities now have until March 21, 2025, to comply. Businesses should act promptly to avoid civil penalties of $591 per day and potential criminal liability.

Status Update: Physician Noncompete Agreements in Ohio

Noncompete agreements remain enforceable in Ohio if they meet specific legal requirements. While the AMA and FTC have challenged these restrictions, courts continue to uphold reasonable noncompete provisions for physicians. Recent cases, like MetroHealth System v. Khandelwal, highlight how courts may modify overly restrictive agreements to balance employer interests with patient care. With ongoing legal challenges to the FTC’s proposed ban, Ohio physicians should consult a healthcare attorney before signing or challenging a noncompete agreement.

Immigration Orders and Their Economic Impact on Small Business: Insights from Attorney and Former Immigration Judge Rob Ratliff

President Trump's recent executive orders, targeting immigration policies, could significantly impact small businesses in Ohio, particularly those owned by undocumented immigrants. With stricter visa vetting, halted refugee admissions, and potential deportations, these businesses face uncertainty, workforce disruption, and closures. Ohio's immigrant-owned businesses, especially in food services and transportation, contribute billions to the state economy, and any disruption could result in economic ripple effects.

Corporate Transparency Act Ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled on the enforceability of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), lifting an injunction previously imposed by the Fifth Circuit. However, a separate nationwide injunction remains in effect, meaning businesses are still not required to comply with the CTA’s reporting requirements. FinCEN continues to accept voluntary reporting while enforcement remains paused.

Lead Paint Contamination and Resources for Ohio Landlords

Children are exposed to lead-based paint, which was used in most homes until it was banned in the US in 1978 and “can severely damage the brain and central nervous system causing coma, convulsions and even death.” Property owners and landlords should educate themselves on regulations and resources to mitigate their own liability.