SSR 76-27: SECTION 1614(d)(2) and 1614(f)(1) (42 U.S.C. 1382c(d)(2) and 1382c(f)(1)) -- SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME -- MARITAL RELATIONSHIP

20 CFR 416.1003(b) and (c) and 416.1005(a)

SSR 76-27

The general issue is whether the claimant is a "husband" under section

1614(d)(2) of the Social Security Act, as amended, and if so, is the

claimant affected by the deeming provisions of section 1614(f)(1) of the

Social Security Act, as amended. The specific issues to be decided are:

Whether the claimant and a woman who are holding themselves out as man and

wife to the community in which they reside, are husband and wife under the

Social Security Act; and what effect would a State's nonrecognition of a

common-law marriage have in the final determination as to whether they are

husband and wife?

The claimant, an obviously disabled individual, appeared at the hearing

with a woman whom he identified as his wife, Eve. Claimant admitted at the

hearing that he considered Eve to be his wife and that they had lived

together holding themselves out to the community as man and wife since

1971. He indicated that there had never been a formal marriage ceremony

binding them but that they looked upon one another as husband and wife.

Eve also indicated in her testimony at the hearing that the claimant's

testimony was substantially correct. Both indicated that the child now

living with them was the natural son of the claimant and Eve.

Section 1614(d)(2) of the Social Security Act provides that:

Section 416.1005(a) of Regulations No. 16 reads in part as follows:

Section 416.1003(b) and (c) of Regulations No. 16 in this regard reads as

follows:

r testimony at the hearing that the claimant's

testimony was substantially correct. Both indicated that the child now

living with them was the natural son of the claimant and Eve.

Section 1614(d)(2) of the Social Security Act provides that:

Section 416.1005(a) of Regulations No. 16 reads in part as follows:

Section 416.1003(b) and (c) of Regulations No. 16 in this regard reads as

follows:

Claimant does not contest the factual situation in the case but disagrees

with the legal application of the Law and Regulations dealing with the

legal definition of husband and wife and the application of deeming

provisions. Claimant's main contention is that since the State of Kentucky

does not recognize common-law marriages that this would preclude the

Federal Government, specifically the Social Security Administration, from

recognizing their common-law marriage, and thus finding that claimant and

Eve were husband and wife and further finding that the deeming provisions

of the Social Security Act would apply.

Since claimant and Eve have conceded that they have held themselves out

as husband and wife in the community, and have considered themselves to be

husband and wife since 1971, the question for decision is, what effect

does the State of Kentucky's refusal to recognize common-law marriage have

on the Federal Government's recognition of the claimant and Eve as husband

and wife? The answer is found in the above cited Section 1614(d)(2) of the

Social Security Act.

s husband and wife in the community, and have considered themselves to be

husband and wife since 1971, the question for decision is, what effect

does the State of Kentucky's refusal to recognize common-law marriage have

on the Federal Government's recognition of the claimant and Eve as husband

and wife? The answer is found in the above cited Section 1614(d)(2) of the

Social Security Act.

This section of the Act is intended to inform us that whether or not a

State recognizes a common-law marriage is not the criteria by which the

Federal Government will ultimately decide whether or not a man and woman

are truly husband and wife. This section indicates that if a State were to

find a common-law relationship between a man and woman and were to

recognize such relationship as a valid marriage, the Federal Government

would accept this in determining that they were man and wife. This section

indicates that if a State were to find a common-law relationship between a

man and woman and were to recognize such relationship as a valid marriage,

the Federal Government would accept this in determining that they were man

and wife. In the reverse situation where no valid marriage is recognized

by a State, the Federal Government, more specifically the Social Security

Administration, is directed to look at the specific relationship between

the man and woman themselves, i.e., do they treat one another as man and

wife, do they indicate to others in the surrounding area in which they

live that they are man and wife?

Once it is determined that claimant and Eve are husband and wife, whether

common-law or otherwise, or whether or not recognized by the State in

which they reside, the application of the deeming provisions of the Social

Security Act must follow. Subject to certain exclusions in the Social

Security Act, the income and resources of Eve will be deemed to the

claimant.

they are man and wife?

Once it is determined that claimant and Eve are husband and wife, whether

common-law or otherwise, or whether or not recognized by the State in

which they reside, the application of the deeming provisions of the Social

Security Act must follow. Subject to certain exclusions in the Social

Security Act, the income and resources of Eve will be deemed to the

claimant.

In view of the above premises, the Hearing Examiner concludes that the

claimant and Eve are husband and wife and have been husband and wife,

according to their own testimony, since 1971 and, will continue to be

husband and wife. Furthermore, since they are husband and wife, as defined

by Section 1614(d)(2), Social Security Act, as amended, they automatically

are subject to the income and resources deeming provisions of Section

1614(f)(1) of the Social Security act, as amended, which provides:

It is the decision of the Hearing Examiner that the claimant and Eve are

husband and wife as defined by Section 1614(d)(2) of the Social Security

Act, as amended, and as such they are subject to the income and resources

deeming provisions of Section 1614(f)(1) of the Social Security act, as

amended.