I've relied on Medicaid for years — but after inheriting $250K recently, I'm worried about losing my benefits
Imagine this scenario: Two decades ago, Kristin was driving home from a friend's house when she was struck by a drunk driver, who hit her car head-on. After surviving a coma and suffering a brain injury that made it impossible to work, she's been on Medicaid ever since.
While she has enough money to get by — she has no debt and owns her house — she doesn't have much left over at the end of the month. That's why, when she found out she had inherited $250,000 from her best friend, she was incredibly grateful. But also a little worried.
Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how
I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 5 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast)
Nervous about the stock market in 2025? Find out how you can access this $1B private real estate fund (with as little as $10)
A large lump sum of cash would bump Kristin over the income eligibility limit for Medicaid, so she could lose her benefits.
She's now worried about Medicaid's five-year Look-Back Rule, a period during which Medicaid can evaluate a recipient's financial history to ensure they're not artificially reducing their net worth. If so, a penalty period would apply.
Not only is Kristin worried about losing her Medicaid coverage, she's also worried she might end up in violation of the Look-Back Rule and that a Medicaid lien would be placed on her property when she dies, so she wouldn't be able to pass on her remaining assets to her children.
Are her concerns valid or are there ways to make the windfall work more in her favor?
The Affordable Care Act determines income eligibility for Medicaid based on Modified Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI). To receive Medicaid, you can't exceed monthly income and asset limits, which differ by state. In most cases, a single senior applicant can't exceed $2,901 a month in income, according to the American Council on Aging (ACOA).
'In 2025, most states have an asset limit of $2,000 for an individual senior applicant and $3,000 for an elderly couple,' the ACOA writes. Some assets are exempt, such as the applicant's house, vehicle and personal belongings. Each state sets its own rules around how IRAs, 401(k)s and pensions are accounted for, too.
An inheritance would count as income in the month it's received; in Kristin's case, it would push her way over the income limit for Medicaid benefits.
The first thing Kristin should do is report the inheritance to her state Medicaid agency.
'Medicaid will view the inheritance either as income and/or assets, depending on when the inheritance was received and how long it has been since receipt,' the ACOA writes.
But she should do it as soon as possible.
'While a Medicaid beneficiary generally has 10 calendar days to report the receipt of an inheritance, this timeframe could be shorter or longer, depending on the state,' the ACOA says.
If you don't, and the inheritance disqualifies you from Medicaid, then you'd be responsible for reimbursing Medicaid for any benefits you received during that time.
Each state has different rules, which can add to the confusion. A Medi-Cal recipient in California, for example, is allowed to gift an inheritance to a third party, so long as it's done in the same month it's received. The state also has no Look-Back Rule in place for assets transferred after Jan. 1, 2024.
Read more: You're probably already overpaying for this 1 'must-have' expense — and thanks to Trump's tariffs, your monthly bill could soar even higher. Here's how 2 minutes can protect your wallet right now
It's possible to 'spend down' your inheritance, too — so long as it doesn't violate the Look-Back Rule.
'If the money is spent in its entirety during the month of receipt and without violating Medicaid's Look-Back Rule, one will be eligible for Medicaid again the following month,' according to the ACOA.
That might mean paying off debt, paying for long-term care, making home modifications or renovations for accessibility purposes or buying assets that are exempt from the asset limit, such as clothing or home appliances. You could even pre-pay funeral expenses through an Irrevocable Funeral Trust.
There are also strategies that may allow someone to benefit from an inheritance without losing Medicaid. These include:
Pooled Special Needs Trusts (SNTs): To get around the Look-Back Rule, Kristin could transfer the inheritance into a Pooled Special Needs Trust (SNT), which is typically run by a charitable or philanthropic organization (there are several hundred to choose from in the U.S.). These transfers are exempt from the Look-Back Rule since they no longer count toward the recipient's income or assets, according to the Brain Injury Association of America, but ensures they still have resources for long-term care.
Medicaid-Compliant Annuities (MCAs): Buying an MCA means you give an insurance company a lump sum of cash, which is then converted into a steady income stream. When properly structured, it allows you to lower your countable assets so you don't lose Medicaid benefits — but not all states treat annuities the same way.
Medicaid Asset Protection Trusts (MAPTs): Sometimes called a Medicaid Planning Trust or Medicaid Trust, a MAPT protects a Medicaid recipient by putting their excess assets into a trust. The recipient names a trustee and beneficiary who will inherit those assets. Since the recipient who created the trust no longer owns those assets, it won't count toward Medicaid's asset limit.
A MAPT can also be used to protect assets for a recipient's children or other family members. For example, it can help to protect assets from Medicaid's Estate Recovery, where the agency tries to reimburse the cost of the recipient's care from their estate after they pass away.
Before Kristin makes a decision, she may want to consult with an attorney. It's worth looking for an attorney who is a member of the National Elder Law Foundation or the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys and is familiar with the challenges that older adults can face.
Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says this 7-step plan 'works every single time' to kill debt, get rich in America — and that 'anyone' can do it
Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead
Robert Kiyosaki warns of a 'Greater Depression' coming to the US — with millions of Americans going poor. But he says these 2 'easy-money' assets will bring in 'great wealth'. How to get in now
Here are 5 'must have' items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you?
This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Trump budget proposal could tighten access to housing vouchers in Nevada
Trump budget proposal could tighten access to housing vouchers in Nevada More than 15,000 households in Nevada rely on federally funded housing vouchers, with thousands more waiting years to access vital rental assistance. Representatives from the local housing authorities worry many would be locked out of vouchers and other assistance under President Donald Trump's proposed budget, which calls for billions of dollars in cuts to housing programs. 'Based on our current average monthly subsidy in our Housing Choice Voucher Program, we've estimated that for every million-dollar reduction in housing assistance, it would be approximately 93 fewer households that we would be able to serve,' said Dr. Hilary Lopez, the executive director for the Reno Housing Authority. An estimated 15,300 people in Nevada rely on housing choice vouchers, formerly known as section 8 vouchers, which provide rental assistance subsidies for low-income people, seniors and people with disabilities, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. The number doesn't include other types of specialized vouchers, such as emergency solutions housing vouchers designed to pay rent for people and families at risk or experiencing homelessness. Another 2,500 people live in public housing throughout the state, according to data from CBPP. Trump's budget requests, which have been formed into the 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' were passed overwhelmingly by House Republicans in late May and are currently being debated in the Senate. The proposal, which aims to slash Medicaid and food assistance programs, would reduce the Department of Housing and Urban Development's budget by more than 40% amid a national housing and homeless crisis. The cuts to homeless assistance dollars include a $27 billion reduction in funding to the State Rental Assistance Block Grant, which funds housing vouchers. The recommendations released by the White House in May said the proposed cuts 'would encourage States to provide funding to share in the responsibility to ensure that similar levels of recipients can benefit from the block grant.' If these proposed cuts are approved it 'would be staggering in both scale and impact,' Renee Willis, the president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition, said in a press call last week. 'Rather than preserving and strengthening the federal rental assistance program that serves as a lifeline for these communities, the budget proposed consolidating HUD's five largest rental assistance programs into a single state-run block grant,' Willis said. 'It also imposed a two-year time limit on assistance.' She added that the budget proposal is not only 'misguided but fundamentally unjust' but that it 'abdicates the government's responsibility to address poverty and housing stability.' While the full scope of these cuts, or the state and local impact of reductions, has yet to be determined, social service providers and local governments fear any cuts to HUD funding would reduce Nevada's already fragile social safety net to tatters. The Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority declined to answer questions about the proposed budget cuts as well as how it currently used federal funding dollars. 'While federal funding changes are uncertain at this time, we remain laser focused on our mission to provide safe, sanitary and affordable housing to eligible residents within our jurisdictions – housing that will provide an environment that fosters independence, self-sufficiency and community pride,' Lewis Jordan, executive director of the Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority said in a statement. Bill Brewer, the executive director for the Nevada Rural Housing Authority, said he is still waiting to see what the final budget will look like. Any amount would mean less people in rural areas being served. 'Worst case scenario, if we took a 40% cut to our vouchers, then we would be looking at cutting about 500 households off of assistance out of our approximately 1,275 voucher holders,' he said. 'If it was just 12% or 10%, then we're still looking at losing 120 to 130 households' 'They'll simply lose their support' The Southern Nevada Regional Housing Authority currently oversees the lion's share of housing assistance, around 12,000 vouchers for low income residents. Reno Housing Authority, which provides assistance throughout Washoe County, allocated around 2,094 housing choice vouchers last year. Nevada Rural Housing Authority oversaw about 1,100 vouchers, not including specialized housing assistance. Reno Housing Authority relies on two main federal funding sources: $32 million from the federal government to provide housing vouchers along with $3 million to administer public housing. 'It does fluctuate on an annual basis and really depends upon federal appropriations,' Lopez said. Of the more than 2,000 households – roughly 3,600 people – that rely on housing choice vouchers in the Reno area, Lopez said close to three-quarters of clients who receive housing choice vouchers are seniors or disabled households. The breakdown is similar for the 600 households living in a public housing unit. Average income for those relying on housing vouchers is roughly $18,000, according to the authority's 2025 annual report. Nevada's housing shortage and skyrocketing rent prices have made it difficult for the authority to meet the demand for services, Lopez said. 'Over the last several years, we've seen those rents consistently rise,' Lopez said. 'What that means is that the average rental subsidy that we're providing has also been increasing over time and that also impacts the number of clients that we can assist.' The rural authority gets about $12 million for its housing choice vouchers, which funds its 1,077 vouchers throughout the rural areas. Additionally it received last year $786,340 for Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Vouchers, which provides assistance for 76 veterans experiencing homelessness. Similar to the Reno authority, Brewer said roughly two-thirds of housing voucher recipients are elderly or disabled. 'They're not the kind of folks that can go out and get a job and take care of themselves,' he said. 'They're already living on Social Security or supplemental Social Security, and they simply can't afford a $1,500 a month rent payment. That's all the money they get in most cases.' Demand for housing assistance is growing. Reno's authority has about 4,000 people waiting to apply for housing vouchers while the rural authorities have 2,248 applicants waiting. 'What we try to do for households on our wait list, we try to serve them within anywhere from about 18 to 36 months,' Lopez said. The waitlist in rural Nevada opened last year and 'within a week's time, we had about 5,000 applicants on there,' according to Brewer. 'We had to close the list.' 'It will take us at least two years, if not longer, to work through that list,' he added. 'I think we still have a couple thousand names on there that we will work through.' Nevadans wait an average of 38 months, more than three years, to receive housing vouchers, according to 2021 data from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. In addition to housing choice vouchers, communities across the country, including those in Nevada, also began receiving funding for emergency housing vouchers through the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 signed by President Joe Biden. Funding for that is expected to be depleted by the end of 2026. Willis from the National Low Income Housing Coalition said Trump's current budget request doesn't provide additional funding for these emergency vouchers and could 'put more than 60,000 households at risk of losing their assistance and being pushed into homelessness.' The rural authority received $455,616 for Emergency Housing Vouchers, which support 36 people. Washoe County previously told the Nevada Current 137 people rely on emergency housing vouchers in the county. In a 'normal year,' Brewer said the rural authority would just roll people relying on emergency housing voucher holders 'onto a regular Section 8 voucher.' He doesn't know if that would be possible if the proposed cuts are passed. 'If our voucher program overall is cut, we won't have any room to bring those people on to the (housing choice) vouchers,' he said. 'They'll simply lose their support.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Minnesota Legislature to pass gloomy $66 billion budget
Lights stay on inside the Minnesota State Capitol Building as the sun sets during a special legislative session Monday, June 9, 2025. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer) The Minnesota Legislature was expected to pass the final bills comprising the $66 billion, 2026-27 budget in the early hours of Tuesday morning — an 8% decrease from the previous biennium. With final passage of budget bills after a marathon 21-hour special legislative session, the divided Legislature was on pace to hit the most important deadline of all — June 30, after which a partial state government shutdown would commence, affecting schools, roads and social services. The bleary-eyed finish late Monday and early Tuesday morning is a fitting end to a fitful session, which began just after a Democratic senator died in office, putting the upper chamber in a 33-33 tie, later resolved by a Democratic victory in a special session. T he Minnesota Supreme Court was forced to settle a dispute between Republicans and Democrats over the control of the House after Democrats boycotted the Capitol for multiple weeks. Another special election brought the House into a 67-67 tie and a power-sharing agreement. A Democratic senator had her burglary trial delayed, and a Republican senator was arrested in a police sting and charged with one count of attempted coercion and enticement of a minor. Lawmakers adjourned on May 19 without a budget deal, which was followed by weeks of secret negotiations. Lawmakers this session also confronted a tough fiscal reality: The state is spending more money than it's bringing in and is expected to blow through its reserves as soon as 2028. While tax revenues have regularly exceeded expectations, the cost of providing government services — particularly care for the elderly and disabled — has grown even faster. 'The budget we are passing will fund the services Minnesotans rely on to live their daily lives, including care for people with disabilities and seniors, maintenance for roads and bridges, funding for courts and correctional facilities, and support for veterans,' Senate Majority Leader Erin Murphy, DFL-St. Paul, said in a statement. 'We are making difficult but responsible decisions to reduce the budget without sacrificing core services.' Senate Minority Leader Mark Johnson, R-East Grand Forks, who hopes to be the majority leader in 18 months, criticized the budget for not cutting spending and taxes. 'We are here today not because we agree with this budget,' Johnson said. 'Minnesotans deserve much, much better.' Legislators could find themselves back in St. Paul later this year: Federal cuts — like those included in the Trump-backed One Big Beautiful Bill Act — could quickly put the state in a more dire financial position. In 2024, Minnesota spent $18.5 billion on Medical Assistance, Minnesota's Medicaid program, and the federal government covered $11 billion of that. Any Medicaid cuts on the federal level will have major ramifications for the state budget, especially DHS. Many lawmakers are expecting to return to the Capitol sometime in the fall or winter for another special session to grapple with the steep cuts to Minnesota's budget once the federal cuts are signed into law, as expected. Here's some key takeaways from the now completed budget, pending the signature of Gov. Tim Walz, who has 14 days after he receives them to sign or veto the bills passed during the Tuesday special session: The budget is smaller than the record-breaking $72 billion two-year budget passed by the DFL-controlled Legislature in 2023, which was bolstered by the American Rescue Plan and other federal spending under President Joe Biden. The budget bills take a step towards resolving the deficit projected to begin in the 2028-29 budget years, but don't avert it entirely. It closes the gap between revenue and spending by 45%, and will leave approximately $1.9 billion on the bottom line at the end of the biennium. But current projections — which are likely to change significantly based on the economy and federal budget — predict a $290 million deficit in 2028-29. The budget will cut approximately $283 million from projected expenditures over the next two years, with most of the savings coming from the Department of Human Services. Republicans, who control half of the House, won a major concession from the DFL: the repeal of MinnesotaCare eligibility for undocumented adults. The vote came after impassioned speeches from Democrats opposed to the bill. Rep. Kaohly Her, a St. Paul Democrat, said she was 'illegal' because her father lied on an immigration paper to expedite her family's journey to the United States, highlighting the desperate circumstances many immigrants find themselves in. She later clarified that she and her family are American citizens. Lawmakers opted not to give agencies a bump in funding to cover inflation, except for areas of the budget where inflation is built into funding formulas, like education and some areas of DHS. The move saves money across the budget, but will squeeze state agencies as the cost of providing services outpaces their funding. The budget holds education funding steady for the next two years. It also funds pay raises for home care and nursing home workers. The Legislature was also expected to pass a $700 million infrastructure package to pay for upgrades to the state's roads and bridges. The package, known as a bonding bill around the Capitol because it's funded with borrowed money, requires a three-fifths supermajority to pass. It was expected to garner enough votes to pass, though as one of the last bills.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
If You Invested $10K In Equity Residential Stock 10 Years Ago, How Much Would You Have Now?
Benzinga and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue on some items through the links below. Equity Residential (NYSE:EQR) is a real estate investment trust, which acquires, develops and manages residential properties located in and around dynamic cities that attract affluent long-term renters. The company's stock traded at approximately $71.49 per share 10 years ago. If you had invested $10,000, you could have bought roughly 140 shares. Currently, shares trade at $69.01, meaning your investment's value could have declined to $9,653 from stock price depreciation. However, Equity Residential also paid dividends during these 10 years. Don't Miss: Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing — Invest Where It Hurts — And Help Millions Heal: Equity Residential's dividend yield is currently 4.01%. Over the last 10 years, it has paid about $37.03 in dividends per share, which means you could have made $5,180 from dividends alone. Summing up $9,653 and $5,180, we end up with the final value of your investment, which is $14,833. This is how much you could have made if you had invested $10,000 in Equity Residential stock 10 years ago. This means a total return of 48.33%. However, this figure is significantly less than the S&P 500 total return for the same period, which was 242.51%. Equity Residential has a consensus rating of "Neutral" and a price target of $74.52 based on the ratings of 27 analysts. The price target implies a nearly 8% potential upside from the current stock price. Trending: Maximize saving for your retirement and cut down on taxes: . On April 29, the company announced its Q1 2025 earnings, posting FFO of $0.95, beating the consensus estimate of $0.94, while revenues of $760.81 million came in below the consensus of $767.13 million, as reported by Benzinga. "We are encouraged to begin the year with operating performance that exceeded our expectations and that leaves us well positioned going into our primary leasing season," said CEO Mark J. Parrell. "We expect our business to be resilient in the face of heightened economic uncertainty. Demand, supply and lifestyle preferences all favor our high quality apartment rental business, and our diversified portfolio and efficient operating platform should maximize performance in any economic climate." For its Q2 2025, the company expects EPS in the range of $0.49 to $0.53, and FFO per share of $0.95 to $0.99. Check out this article by Benzinga for six analysts' insights on Equity Residential. Given the expected upside potential, growth-focused investors may find Equity Residential stock attractive. Furthermore, they can benefit from the company's solid dividend yield of 4.01%. Read Next: If there was a new fund backed by Jeff Bezos offering a ? , which provides access to a pool of short-term loans backed by residential real estate with just a $100 minimum. Image: Shutterstock This article If You Invested $10K In Equity Residential Stock 10 Years Ago, How Much Would You Have Now? originally appeared on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data