From the Shreveport Times:
A Shreveport surgeon was found guilty by a federal jury on Friday of stealing more than $200,000 in Social Security disability payments.
Dr. John Owings, chief of trauma at LSU Health Shreveport, was found guilty of 20 counts of theft of government property and one count of concealing or failing to disclose an event affecting right to a government benefits.
The United States presented evidence during trial showing that Owings applied for disability benefits in 2008 and continued to receive those benefits through June of 2017, after returning to work in 2012,” a release from the Department of Justice states. “When Owings went back to work as a surgeon at the University of California-Davis in 2012, making $22,000 a month, he failed to tell the Social Security Administration (SSA) about his return to work.” ...
Shreveport surgeon was found guilty by a federal jury on Friday of stealing more than $200,000 in Social Security disability payments.
Yes, he failed to notify SSA of his return to work. But, if the earnings were properly reported, it should have generated an alert. If the alert was generated, why so long to investigate?
ReplyDelete@ 10:15AM - the backlogs are tremendous. No one wants to hear that, but it's the truth. Along with the "back to work" workloads being complex, burdensome, and labor intensive. How about the beneficiary just reporting the work, because they are supposed to? Something very soon needs to he fune CV to simplify much of SSA rules and regulations. Those employees with the technical knowledge and skills are leaving and retiring. Then see how fast or accurately things get accomplished.
ReplyDeleteIt should have generated an alert, if the wages were reported as his income on his SS number. Of course, this often does take several years. This may have been caught a couple of years ago and just went to trial.
ReplyDeleteAnd, it is also possible the the earnings weren't reported at all, or were reported as income to a subchapter S corporations that contracted with UC Davis with him as the only employee. The earnings might go as a 1099 and he is supposed to then report those earnings as either wages from the S-Corp or as 1099 income to him individually and he just somehow forgot to report them.
Crooks can be very clever. too often, SS is not.
Why aren't the IRS and SS databases talking to each other?
ReplyDeleteSSA overpaid a family member SSI payments for a YEAR after she began working. She called to report returning to work and asked for them to stop the payments. They said it was her money, and to spend it. What the representatives didn't understand is that she was on SSI, NOT SSDI, leaving her owing about $24,000. She did not understand the difference, as we all know, SSA is very complicated. It really is up to the representatives' to get the information correct for the claimant. If no alert was made in THIS case here with the surgeon, then who would think an alert would pop up for said family member owing significantly less? She did not have to pay the money back, as it wasn't her fault and she was told to spend it (verified by SSA). This is what happens when you call the national number to report income. It's just safer to go into a field office face-to-face. Not sure why this surgeon would try to defraud SSA? Making $22,000 a MONTH? If it wasn't YEARS, I would think it was an honest mistake, but not in this case, I don't think.
ReplyDeleteAn overpayment for SSI in the amount of $24000 is not even possible because SSI does not even come anywhere close to paying $2000 per month. Even ihe states that pay a state supplement, not possible.
DeleteThis is probably a Title II case not a XVI. As many physicians now do, there was probably an LLC or other entity with a fictitious name receiving payment from the hospital. As an independent contractor, not an employee, normal FICA and other taxes were probably not being withheld. As such, the normal reporting to IRS regarding a working beneficiary was not being recorded. Beyond the fraud, there may also be a tax case which is also in process. In the final analysis it would have probably involved one of the schemes noted above or some other variation to have gone on so long. SSA requires regular reporting, and the failure to do so, would have suspended payments at that point in time. Also, there maybe an LTD carrier in the picture. An interesting case, but not very common.
ReplyDeleteThat $24,000.00 for a year of SSI is off, but whatever it was, I'm glad the person didn't have to repay anything.
ReplyDeleteThe doctor was crazy. We have the 9 month trial work period for Title II where he could see if he could swing it. Just tell your LOCAL office you're working, get work and social security for 9 months, and then call them again.