Client Alerts & Insights
Benesch COVID-19 Resource Center: Recovery Rebates Not Countable for Public Assistance Purposes
March 31, 2020
Authored By:
As has been widely publicized, the CARE Act includes a provision for one time payments, referred to as “recovery rebates”, of up to $1200 for some taxpayers and certain non-taxpayers. The amounts will vary depending upon marital status, number of children and annual income as determined by either a taxpayer’s 2018 or 2019 Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) as found on the taxpayer’s tax return. Persons who have not filed a tax return for either of those years and who are otherwise eligible may file a return to qualify. Recipients of these payments who are also recipients of, or applicants for, federally funded public assistance benefits such as Medicaid and SNAP ( Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) can receive these payments without fear of losing eligibility for their public assistance benefits. These rebate payments do not count as income or resources for a 12-month period in determining eligibility for, or the amount of assistance provided by, any federally funded public benefit program. In addition, these payments are not taxable. This is good news for the those on Medicaid benefits and for their providers.
For further information about the rebates and who qualifies, see the Congressional Research Service Report here.
If you have any questions regarding the content above, please contact a member of your Benesch team.
Martha J. Sweterlitsch at msweterlitsch@beneschlaw.com or 614.223.9367.
Jessica N. Angney at jangney@beneschlaw.com or 216.363.4620.
***
Please note that this information is current as of the date of this client bulletin, based on the available data. However, because COVID-19’s status and updates related to the same are ongoing, we recommend real-time review of guidance distributed by CDC and local officials.

Latest News
DOJ’s National Fraud Enforcement Division Issues Corporate Enforcement Directive, Signaling Heightened Scrutiny of Corporate Fraud
DOJ’s new enforcement framework reinforces that corporate fraud investigations will remain a significant enforcement priority, particularly in healthcare, government contracting, tax and international trade.
Lessons from Kai Spears v. The New York Times Co.: A Historic Defamation Verdict
The first defamation verdict against The New York Times in more than 50 years highlights the significant litigation risks that can arise when reporting relies on inadequately vetted anonymous sources and critical editorial safeguards are not followed.
Back To Wright Line: NLRB Resets Standards for Workplace Misconduct
Employers have regained greater flexibility to address offensive or abusive employee conduct that occurs during union activity or other activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act. On September 23, 2026, the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) issued a significant decision in Lion Elastomers LLC, 375 NLRB No. 41, restoring the prior standard for evaluating discipline when employee misconduct occurs during protected concerted activity from General Motors LLC, 369 NLRB No. 127.
Can an Algorithm Commit a Tort? The Circuit Split Over Section 230
A growing circuit split is reshaping the scope of Section 230 immunity. While the Fourth and Ninth Circuits continue to view algorithmic recommendations as protected publisher conduct, the Third Circuit has taken a narrower approach, holding that certain algorithm-driven content recommendations may constitute a platform’s own conduct and therefore fall outside Section 230’s protections.