1. (a) Cash on hand and money on deposit, less the amount received during the month and counted as income, is a countable resource.

2. (b)

   1. (1) Cash on hand includes amounts that the individual has on his or her person and amounts that he or she has at home.
   2. (2) Money on deposit may be in a bank, savings and loan, credit union, or other financial institution.

3. (c) Jointly held bank accounts with non-Supplemental Security Income recipients.

   1. (1)

      1. (A) If joint ownership exists, then the amount considered to be owned by each of the joint owners will be a pro rata amount rather than the full amount.
      2. (B) If it is determined that the transitional employment assistance (TEA) client does not actually own the funds in a jointly held account, then none will be considered a resource to the client.

   2. (2)

      1. (A) When a TEA client has a bank account with a non-Supplemental Security Income person, ownership of the account must be determined prior to determining whether it is a resource to the client.
      2. (B) This applies equally to all situations in which at least one (1) of the persons named on the account is a non-TEA person whose resources are not considered.

   3. (3)

      1. (A) A person is considered as the owner of funds in a bank account if that person earned, received, or was given the funds.
      2. (B) As this relates to married couples, for TEA purposes, it is normally presumed that both husband and wife are joint owners of funds in a jointly held bank account.
      3. (C) However, this presumption does not preclude ownership by just one.
      4. (D) When there is written documentation, clearly establishing that joint ownership is not intended, then ownership by just one may be determined to exist.

   4. (4) Ownership may be verified:

      1. (A) By written statements from the persons whose names are on the account (primary method); or
      2. (B) Through collateral contacts. Example: Mr. and Mrs. Jones are currently separated but still have a joint savings account with a balance of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500). Joint ownership does exist, so one–half (1/2), or seven hundred fifty dollars ($750), will be considered to be owned by each one. Therefore, seven hundred fifty dollars ($750), Mrs. Jones’ share, will be considered a countable resource.

4. (d) Jointly held bank accounts with Supplemental Security Income recipients.

   1. (1)

      1. (A) Any funds in a jointly held bank account that are being considered in determining a Supplemental Security Income recipient’s eligibility are not considered in determining TEA eligibility.
      2. (B) This applies to all situations in which a TEA client’s name is on a bank account with a Supplemental Security Income recipient, including situations in which the Supplemental Security Income recipient is the TEA client’s child or spouse.
   2. (2) Any funds not being considered for Supplemental Security Income purposes will be considered for TEA purposes according to subsection (c) of this section.

   3. (3)

      1. (A) Supplemental Security Income policy presumes that all funds in a bank account that is jointly owned by a Supplemental Security Income recipient and another person belong to the Supplemental Security Income recipient.
      2. (B) The Supplemental Security Income recipient may rebut this presumption if some or all of the funds belong to the other person.
      3. (C) However, unless the Supplemental Security Income recipient successfully rebuts the presumption, then Supplemental Security Income will consider all of the funds in the account for Supplemental Security Income purposes.
      4. (D) In that case, none of the funds are considered for TEA purposes even if the TEA client’s name is on the bank account.

   4. (4)

      1. (A) When a TEA client’s name is on any type of bank account with a Supplemental Security Income recipient, it will be presumed that all of the funds in the account are being considered for Supplemental Security Income purposes.
      2. (B) It is not necessary to verify with Supplemental Security Income whether the bank account funds are being considered for Supplemental Security Income purposes unless the TEA client advises that:

5. (i) Supplemental Security Income is not considering all of the funds; or

   1. (ii) The amount in the account would appear to cause Supplemental Security Income ineligibility if considered.

      1. (C) In either of those situations, the worker will verify with Supplemental Security Income whether the funds are being considered in determining the Supplemental Security Income recipient’s eligibility.

   2. (5)

      1. (A) Except in the above two (2) situations, it is not necessary to verify with Supplemental Security Income whether the bank account funds are being considered for Supplemental Security Income purposes.
      2. (B) It will be presumed that they are being considered for Supplemental Security Income and, therefore, will not be considered for TEA.

Codification Notes: This section as promulgated prior to codification into the Code of Arkansas Rules provided as follows: “07/01/97”