MEANS TEST
Means Test is a policy for the provision of social assistance or services which
determines access by considering whether the applicant has the means to provide for the
service from their own resources.
Means test is an official inquiry into an applicant's private resources,
determining or limiting a grant or allowance of money from public funds. Subject a person
to a means test and assess a grant by a means test.
Means-testable is subject to a means test.
Legal aid in most provinces, for example, is means tested; legal aid is provided
without charge to those unable to pay while others pay part or all of the cost of the
service. A policy of universality is opposed to this and is one in which all citizen have
a right to assistance or service without charge.
In the past, for example, the ‘baby bonus’ was offered to all mothers of
children. Similarly, health care is now offered to all citizens without charge regardless
of their income. There is a growing tendency towards means tests, however.
Old age income support is now ‘clawed back’ from seniors with incomes
over a certain amount, for example, and in the future will only be given to those with
income below a set amount.
Do the ends justify the means test? House-passed bill designed to reduce Ch. 7
filings by consumers is not the best means of increasing their payments to creditors
Leta, David E., ALM Media, Inc. The National Law Journal, ISSN: 0162-7325, 1998
Abstract: HR 3150, the bankruptcy reform bill passed by the House of Representatives, bars
access to Chapter 7 to many debtors with the future income to pay creditors, and to obtain
discharges, these debtors would have to file repayment plans under Chapter 13. Supporters
of this bill argue that the former system allows individual debtors to avoid taking enough
personal responsibility for their financial problems, and the bill is backed by the
consumer credit and lending industries. The bill adopts "means testing" for
Chapter 7, which has never been part of the Bankruptcy Code. The bill will not prevent
abusive bankruptcy filings.
The universal means test - Economist Newspaper Ltd., The Economist (UK), ISSN:
0013-0613, 1999
Abstract: Welfare reform in the United Kingdom is increasingly geared toward means
testing. The welfare state was originally seen as providing everyone with benefits, with
everyone paying in contributions. Means testing can give rise to poverty traps and may be
seen as humiliating. The Labor party is divided on this issue. Social insurance is
expensive, and this means that it is difficult both to provide help for the needy, and to
keep taxes at a politically acceptable level.
Does the Owner-Occupier Exemption from the Pensions Means Test Affect Housing
Choice of the Elderly? Evidence from Australia - Renuka Sane, John Piggott, University of
New South Wales - Australian School of Business - School of Economics - October 1, 2008
Abstract: Many developed economies offer the elderly a means tested pension; in most cases
the owner occupied home receives preferential treatment. Such policies create price
distortions which will adversely affect household choice in an important market, and which
has the potential to generate a serious economy-wide misallocation of resources. We study
the impacts of the owner occupied exemption for residential choice among Australia's
elderly, many of whom enjoy access to a means tested age pension, by estimating a model of
trade-down behaviour conditional on mobility, using the Household, Income and Labour
Dynamics (HILDA) data set spanning 5 years from Australia. Results suggest that the
exemption of the owner-occupied home in the age pension means test generates sticky
trade-down behaviour, consistent with resource misallocation.
Living with the Means Test
Charles Jordan Tabb, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign College of Law
Jillian McClelland, University of Illinois College of Law
U Illinois Law & Economics Research Paper No. LE07-004
Abstract: In 2005, Congress radically changed the nature of the consumer bankruptcy system
in the United States with the enactment of BAPCPA (the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and
Consumer Protection Act of 2005). Congress sought to make it harder for consumer debtors
to obtain an immediate discharge of their debts in chapter 7. Instead, individual consumer
debtors with even a modest projected ability to repay creditors out of future income were
labeled abusers and were kicked out of chapter 7. The heart of the consumer debtor
crackdown came in the adoption of a strict means test as a method of proving abuse.
The abuse provisions in BAPCPA introduced substantive and procedural adjustments to the
practice of consumer bankruptcy that have had profound effects on debtors, creditors,
attorneys, trustees, and judges alike. This article explores the impact of the means test
on the players in the bankruptcy system. First, we discuss abuse testing in the Bankruptcy
Code, and note particularly the influence that the consumer credit lending industry
exercised in bringing about the 2005 Amendments. Next, we turn to the statute to perform a
detailed analysis of the provisions of the means test and its necessary calculations and
confusing permutations. Failing or passing the means test is not the end of the story, of
course. From there, we consider how a debtor can rebut the presumption of abuse should he
fail the means test, and how abuse may nonetheless be found should he pass. We observe
that new procedural provisions will add teeth to the means test determination;
specifically, through required trustee reports and abuse motions. Finally, we close with
an examination of added sanctions and advice restrictions imposed on attorneys.
Throughout, we use illustrative emerging case law to highlight several interpretive
controversies that have arisen under BAPCPA. Congress sought to implement as mechanical a
test as possible; however, the cases show that judicial discretion remains a necessary
component to ensure access to bankruptcy relief for those in need, and to weed out those
who could otherwise manipulate the system.
Economic Impact of a Proposed AGI Means Test on Representative Crop Farms
Richardson, James W., Outlaw, Joe L., Raulston, J. Marc - Texas A&M University,
Agricultural and Food Policy Center in its series Briefing Series with number 42087.
Abstract: The Administration has proposed revising the AGI means test for eligibility to
farm program payments. The 2002 farm bill excludes producers from farm program payments
(CCP, DP, and MLG/LDP) if their average adjusted gross income (AGI) for three preceding
years exceeds $2.5 million and less than 75% of their AGI comes from farming, ranching or
forestry operations. The revised means test would reduce the AGI cut-off to $200,000 and
repeal the 75% exclusion. The purpose of this report is to estimate the impacts of the AGI
proposal on average annual government payments and real net worth in 2014 for
representative crop farms. The AFPC maintains a data base of 64 representative commercial
family farms in major production regions across the United States. The farms represent a
full-time, commercial operation that is typical of farms in a particular area. The farmers
who participate in the bi-annual farm update interviews are selected by the county agent
based on farm size (typical for the area), crop mix and farming practices (typical for the
area), and being full-time farmers (not employed off the farm). The farms were constructed
with no off-farm income to illustrate the changes in wellbeing due to farm policy changes.
To the extent that a farm has off-farm income, the results will be conservative.
| |
E-Books
|