HUD Eliminates Two Income Exclusions and Adds Others

HUD Amends List of Income Exclusions

 

On July 24, 2012, HUD published in the Federal Register additional types of income that are excluded from income for purposes of determining eligibility for HUD housing programs. These exclusions also apply to the LIHTC program.

 

Two exclusions have been repealed by Congress, and have thus been removed from the list of excluded income:

 

  1.   Payments received under programs funded in whole or in part under the Job Training Partnership Act. When the Workforce Investment Act was enacted in 1998, it automatically repealed the JTPA. (See #1 below for the current exclusion).
  2.   Any allowance paid to a child suffering from spina bifida who is the child of a Vietnam veteran. This source of income would now be included in income.

The exclusions that are being added are as follows:

 

  1.   Allowances, earnings and payments to individuals participating in programs under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998;
  2.   Any amount received under the School Lunch Act and Child Nutrition Act of 1966, including reduced-price lunches and food under the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC);
  3.    Payments, funds or distributions authorized, established, or directed by the Seneca Nation Settlement Act of 1990;
  4.   Payments from any deferred Department of Veterans Affairs disability benefits that are received in a lump sum amount or in prospective monthly amounts as provided by an amendment to the definition of annual income in the U.S. Housing Act of 1937 by Section 2608 of the HERA of 2008;
  5.  Compensation received by or on behalf of a veteran for service-connected disability, death, dependency, or indemnity compensation as provided by an amendment by the Indian Veterans Housing Opportunity Act of 2010 to the definition of income applicable to programs authorized under the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996; and
  6.  A lump sum or a periodic payment received by an individual Indian pursuant to the Class Action Settlement Agreement in the case entitled Elouise Cobell et al v. Ken Salazar et al., United States District Court, District of Columbia, as provided in the Claims Resolution Act of 2010.
Menu