tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post337917721204320683..comments2024-03-29T07:01:55.138-04:00Comments on Social Security News: SSA Unprepared For SCOTUS Decision On DOMAUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-64658058548741386602013-06-28T17:22:11.735-04:002013-06-28T17:22:11.735-04:00That's not the same argument as listed above. ...That's not the same argument as listed above. Besides, natural wouldn't include step patents. The issue is relevant for parent-child deeming and certainly for spousal deeming.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-52432863449341337302013-06-28T16:03:49.242-04:002013-06-28T16:03:49.242-04:00Deeming should apply in any situation in which bot...Deeming should apply in any situation in which both natural parents are in the HH even if they are not married.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-52829321712404128062013-06-28T15:26:35.827-04:002013-06-28T15:26:35.827-04:00Exactly right. I brought that up in a previous thr...Exactly right. I brought that up in a previous thread. Unless you're prepared to grill everyone about their sexual preferences, "holding out" will almost certainly get scrapped for being disadvantageous to opposite sex couples.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-59938362905734392702013-06-28T14:03:04.376-04:002013-06-28T14:03:04.376-04:00Ironically, this will be disadvantageous to same-s...Ironically, this will be disadvantageous to same-sex couples involved in SSI due to deeming rules and SSI-couples comps. May start having to due holding-out determinations on same-sex households, whether or not they allege being couples. Could get awkward.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-20326267503360829482013-06-28T13:30:36.457-04:002013-06-28T13:30:36.457-04:00That would depend what state you work in I suppose...That would depend what state you work in I suppose. If you're in a state that doesn't recognize it, you're probably right. <br /><br />Not that many married huh? Well, now they have a reason to get married so I'm assuming that number (whatever it is) is sure to rise.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-14657707931906902992013-06-28T12:32:07.808-04:002013-06-28T12:32:07.808-04:00Seriously on the workload issue, it is not that bi...Seriously on the workload issue, it is not that big of a population involved, so how can it be such a disruption? <br /><br />Even in states that have had the law on the books for a while there are not that many people married. Not all of them are getting a benefit or applied. Be serious.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-57209738247028895732013-06-28T09:32:19.221-04:002013-06-28T09:32:19.221-04:00This could not have come at worse time. Shrinking...This could not have come at worse time. Shrinking staff, frozen pay and now, extra work to "hold". <br /><br />This will not go well. <br /><br />The other down side, you're going to be paying more out while taking nothing extra into the trust fund. I wonder if they have run a calculation estimating the impact of the new pay outs? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com