TANF Cash Benefits as of January 1, 2004

CRS Report for Congress
TANF Cash Benefits as of January 1, 2004
Updated September 12, 2005
Meridith Walters, Gene Falk, and Vee Burke
Domestic Social Policy Division

Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

TANF Cash Benefits as of January 1, 2004
Summary
The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant is a major
source of cash assistance — commonly referred to as “welfare” — for low income
families with children. TANF also provides funds to states for a wide range of
benefits and services for both families receiving cash assistance and other families.
Though the federal government provides TANF funds to states, the states themselves
determine cash benefit amounts. As of January 1, 2004, maximum benefit amounts
vary greatly by state: for a family of three, benefits vary from $923 per month in
Alaska to $170 per month in Mississippi.
TANF was created by the 1996 welfare reform law, which ended the Aid to
Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program. States also determined AFDC
benefit amounts, and most have retained their pre-1996 benefit structure under
TANF. During the debate on welfare reform in the mid-1990s, some feared that
fixed funding would lead states to cut benefits in a “race-to-the-bottom.” The race
to the bottom did not happen. In 24 jurisdictions, there was no change in maximum
benefits from July 1996 to January 2004. Twenty-one jurisdictions increased their
benefits; eight of these had benefit increases sufficient to offset inflation over the
period. Six jurisdictions cut benefits.
Maximum benefits are generally paid to families without a wage earner.
However, almost all jurisdictions have increased rewards for recipients who work,
effectively raising the amount of earnings a recipient may keep before she becomes
ineligible for cash assistance. The percent of adult recipients reported as “employed”
climbed from 11% in FY1996 to 26% in FY2002. State TANF programs generally
disregard a sizable share of earnings for at least a period of time (some disregard

100% of earnings for the first few months on a job).

The rules for treating families with earnings vary greatly from state to state, and
thus the level of earnings at which a family becomes ineligible for TANF varies
greatly by state. A recipient in a family of three (single mother, two children) who
obtains a job and works 20 hours a week at a minimum wage job remains eligible for
TANF in most states, though in some she becomes ineligible for assistance in a few
months. However, in most states her earnings plus the Earned Income Tax Credit
(EITC) and food stamps would be insufficient to raise her total income above the
poverty line. A recipient in a family of three who obtains a job and works 40 hours
per week at the minimum wage remains eligible for TANF in the first month on the
job in 29 states. However, after a year on the job, she would be eligible for TANF
cash in only 17 states. In all cases, with or without TANF, the family with year-
round, 40 hour per week, minimum wage earnings would have total income
(counting federally determined food stamps and EITC) slightly about the poverty
threshold.
This report will be updated when information about January 2005 benefit levels
becomes available.

Contents
In troduction ......................................................1
Maximum Benefit Amounts under TANF...............................2
Maximum Benefits by Family Size................................2
Maximum Combined TANF and Food Stamps.......................5
Changes in Maximum Benefits from 1996 to 2004....................7
From Welfare to Work: Eligibility and Benefit Amounts...................9
Income Eligibility..............................................9
Countable Income.........................................9
Earnings Disregards.......................................10
Gross Income Test........................................10
Maximum Earnings Eligibility Thresholds.....................10
Maximum Hours a Minimum Wage Earner Can Work
and Retain Eligibility for TANF.........................16
Family Income by Hours per Week of Work........................18
Earnings Disregards and TANF Work Participation Standards..........25
Appendix A. Resource Limits.......................................26
Appendix B. TANF Exit Points, Monthly Earnings That End Eligibility,
Family of Three, January 1, 2004 ($)..............................30
Appendix C. State Benefit Computation Methods.......................32
List of Tables
Table 1. Maximum Monthly TANF Benefit for Single Parent Families
of One to Six Persons on January 1, 2004...........................3
Table 2. Maximum Combined TANF and Food Stamps Benefit
for Single Parent Families of One to Six Persons on January 1, 2004.....5
Table 3. TANF Maximum Monthly Benefits for a Family
of Three (Single Parent Families): 1996-2004.......................7
Table 4. TANF Maximum Monthly Benefits, Earnings Disregards, and Exit
Points for a Family of Three (Single Parent Families), January 1, 2004...11
Table 5. Maximum Hours per Week That a Minimum Wage Earner Can Work and
Retain Eligibility for TANF Cash Assistance (Based on January 2004 Benefit
Levels and Minimum Wages)...................................16
Table 6. Annualized Earnings and Income from Selected Benefit Programs
for a Single Parent with Two Children, Working 20 Hours per
Week at Minimum Wage, in the 13^th Month of Work, January 1, 2004...19
Table 7. Annualized Earnings and Income from Selected Benefit Programs for a
Single Parent with Two Children, Working 40 Hours per Week at Minimum^th
Wage, in the 13 Month of Work, January 1, 2004...................22
Table A1. TANF Resource Limits and Vehicle Disregards, January 2004....26
Table C1. Benefit Computation Methods Used by States
for TANF Cash Assistance, January 2004..........................33

TANF Cash Benefits as of January 1, 2004
Introduction
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act
(PRWORA. P.L. 104-193), also known as the 1996 welfare reform law, ended the
entitlement program of Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) and
replaced it with the state block grant program of Temporary Assistance to Needy
Families (TANF). TANF gives states broad flexibility in the design of their
programs. States have adopted a wide range of financial eligibility and benefit rules
in their cash assistance programs to further the policy objectives of moving families
from welfare to work, supporting work, and moving families off the cash benefit
rolls.
TANF is a major source of cash assistance for low-income families with
children. However, ongoing cash assistance is only one use of TANF funds. States
may use TANF funds on other types of benefits and services, such as child care,
short-term emergency benefits, work programs, or education programs. Following
the state and federal welfare reforms of the mid-1990s, the cash assistance caseload
declined markedly, from a historical high of 5.1 million families in March 1994 to
2.2 million families in September 2003. The shrinkage in the cash assistance
caseload has resulted in a decline in the share of TANF funds devoted to ongoing
cash assistance and an increase in the share of funds spent on other TANF benefits
and services.
This report describes cash assistance benefits paid to families by state TANF
programs on January 1, 2004, with historical data to portray changes in benefit
payments over time. It discusses the rules for determining eligibility and benefit
amounts for a recipient who gets a job, showing the maximum amount of earnings
a family may have and remain eligible for cash welfare. Finally, this report examines
the interaction of TANF with two other federal benefit programs, food stamps and
the earned income tax credit. The report shows total income available from these
sources plus wages at various hours of weekly work, state by state. This report does
not discuss nonfinancial eligibility rules in state TANF cash assistance programs nor
does it cover eligibility rules for the wider range of TANF benefits and services
provided to families.
The information in this report is based on responses to a Congressional Research
Service (CRS) survey of state cash benefit programs. It is possible that in some cases
CRS may have misinterpreted the information provided by the states or failed to ask
the correct questions to elicit the appropriate response.

Maximum Benefit Amounts under TANF
The pre-1996 program of AFDC entitled families with children who met a
state-determined test of need to cash assistance. Federal funding was unlimited.
States determined the amount of cash paid to needy families, subject to minimal
federal guidelines. The block grant of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) established in the 1996 law (P.L. 104-193) eliminated the entitlement to cash
welfare for needy families as well as those federal guidelines. States are not required
to use the TANF block grant to pay cash welfare — it may be used for other benefits
and services to achieve TANF goals — although all states have continued a cash
assistance program.
Under AFDC, states based benefits on financial “need,” which varied by family
size. Financial need was greater the larger the family. The degree of a family’s need
also depended on its nonwelfare income, so maximum AFDC benefits generally were
paid to those with no income other than the welfare benefit.
Most states continue to pay greater maximum benefits for larger families, but
there are some exceptions. Wisconsin pays benefits based on the work activity of the
adult in the family, and its benefit amount is based on the type and hours of work
performed by the adult, not the size of the family. Idaho has the same maximum
benefit ($309) for families of all sizes. Additionally, a number of states have adopted
“family cap” policies that pay a reduced or zero benefit for a new baby born to a
welfare family. A few states have also restructured their benefits to pay lower
maximum benefits for those families with adults who are expected to work.
Under TANF, the maximum benefit still is paid to a family with no income
other than welfare. However, in order to receive the maximum TANF benefit,
families must also be in compliance with work rules and cooperate in establishing
child support orders, because federal TANF law requires states to penalize families
that fail to do so.
AFDC benefits varied greatly among the states. Large variations in benefits
among the states have continued under TANF. In January 2004, maximum benefits
for a family of three ranged from a low of $170 a month in Mississippi to $923 in
Alaska.
Maximum Benefits by Family Size
Table 1 shows maximum monthly benefits by family size for January 2004.
Maximum benefits are generally paid to a family with no income other than the
welfare benefit. The table shows benefits for a family with a single adult. Some
states pay different benefits to families without adult recipients (the “child-only”
cases) or to two-parent families. Some states vary benefit payments by geographic
locations, usually for differences in housing costs. The table generally shows the
highest benefit paid in the state for recipients expected to work, though benefit
amounts are shown for New York City and Wayne County (Detroit) in Michigan

because of the size of the caseload in these localities.¹ Also shown is whether the
state has implemented a “family cap.”
Table 1. Maximum Monthly TANF Benefit for Single Parent
Families of One to Six Persons on January 1, 2004
^Fa^m^ily^size^a
^Fa^m^ily^ca^p^St^a^t^e^O^ne^Tw^o^T^hree^F^o^ur^Fⁱ^v^e^Six
^A^l^abam^a^$165^$190^$215^$245^$275^$305^N^o
^A^l^as^k^a⁵¹⁴⁸²¹⁹²³^1,025^1,127^1,229^N^o
^A^rⁱ^z^on^a²⁰⁴²⁷⁵³⁴⁷⁴¹⁸⁴⁸⁹⁵⁶¹^Y^e^s
^A^r^k^aⁿ^s^as⁸¹¹⁶²²⁰⁴²⁴⁷²⁸⁶³³¹^Y^e^s
^C^a^lⁱ^f^ornⁱ^a³⁴⁹⁵⁶⁸⁷⁰⁴⁸³⁹⁹⁵⁴^1,072^Y^e^s
^C^o^l^o^rado²¹⁴²⁸⁰³⁵⁶⁴³²⁵¹²⁵⁹⁰^N^o
^C^oⁿⁿ^ectⁱ^c^u^t⁴⁰²⁵¹³⁶³⁶⁷⁴¹⁸³⁵⁹³⁵^Y^e^s^.^Partⁱ^a^l
ⁱⁿ^creas^{e f}^o^r
^ad^d^itioⁿ^a^{l ch}^ild
^D^e^l^a^w^a^re²⁰¹²⁷⁰³³⁸⁴⁰⁷⁴⁷⁵⁵⁴⁴^Y^e^s
^D^.^C^.²³⁹²⁹⁸³⁷⁹⁴⁶³⁵³³⁶²⁷^N^o
^F^l^ori^d^a¹⁸⁰²⁴¹³⁰³³⁶⁴⁴²⁶⁴⁸⁷^Y^e^s^.^Partⁱ^a^l
ⁱⁿ^creas^{e f}^o^r
^fⁱ^r^s^{t ad}^d^itioⁿ^a^l
^ch^ild^.
^G^e^orgⁱ^a¹⁵⁵²³⁵²⁸⁰³³⁰³⁷⁸⁴¹⁰^Y^e^s
^H^a^w^aⁱⁱ³³⁵⁴⁵²⁵⁷⁰⁶⁸⁷⁸⁰⁵⁹²²^N^o
^Idah^o³⁰⁹³⁰⁹³⁰⁹³⁰⁹³⁰⁹³⁰⁹ⁿ^/^a
^I^llin^oⁱ^s²²³²⁹²³⁹⁶⁴³⁵⁵⁰⁹⁵⁷²^No
^In^di^an^a¹³⁹²²⁹²⁸⁸³⁴⁶⁴⁰⁵⁴⁶³^Y^e^s
^Iow^a¹⁸³³⁶¹⁴²⁶⁴⁹⁵⁵⁴⁸⁶¹⁰^N^o
^K^aⁿ^s^as²⁶⁷³⁵²⁴²⁹⁴⁹⁷⁵⁵⁸⁶¹⁹^N^o
^K^eⁿ^t^u^c^k^y²²⁰²⁵³²⁸⁹³²⁵³⁶¹³⁹⁸^N^o
^L^o^uⁱ^sⁱ^an^a¹²²¹⁸⁸²⁴⁰²⁸⁴³²⁷³⁶⁶^N^o
^Maiⁿ^e²³⁰³⁶³⁴⁸⁵⁶¹¹⁷³³⁸⁵⁶^N^o
^Mary^l^aⁿ^d²¹³³⁷⁶⁴⁷⁷⁵⁷⁷⁶⁶⁸⁷³⁵^N^o
^Mas^s^ach^u^s^et^t^s⁴¹⁸⁵¹⁸⁶¹⁸⁷¹³⁸¹²⁹¹²^Y^e^s
^Mi^chⁱ^g^an²⁷⁶³⁷¹⁴⁵⁹⁵⁶³⁶⁵⁹⁷⁹²^N^o
^Miⁿⁿ^e^s^o^t^a²⁵⁰⁴³⁷⁵³²⁶²¹⁶⁹⁷⁷⁷³^Y^e^s^.^(N^ew
^p^o^licy^,^fⁱ^r^s^t
^{capped ch}ⁱ^l^d
^w^o^u^l^{d be born}
ⁱⁿ^May²⁰⁰⁴⁾

¹ The highest maximum benefits paid in Michigan in Jan. 2004 were in Washtenaw County
($489 per month for a family of three). The highest maximum benefits paid in New York
state in Jan. 2004 were in Suffolk County ($738 per month for a family of three).

^Fa^m^ily^size^a
^Fa^m^ily^ca^p^St^a^t^e^O^ne^Tw^o^T^hree^F^o^ur^Fⁱ^v^e^Six
^Mi^s^sⁱ^s^sⁱ^ppi¹¹⁰¹⁴⁶¹⁷⁰¹⁹⁴²¹⁸²⁴²^Y^e^s
^Mi^s^s^o^u^rⁱ¹³⁶²³⁴²⁹²³⁴²³⁸⁸⁴³¹^N^o
^Mon^t^an^a²²¹²⁹⁸³⁷⁵⁴⁵²⁵³⁰⁶⁰⁷^N^o
^N^e^bras^k^a²²²²⁹³³⁶⁴⁴³⁵⁵⁰⁶⁵⁷⁷^Y^e^s
^N^e^v^a^da²³⁰²⁸⁹³⁴⁸⁴⁰⁷⁴⁶⁶⁵²⁵^N^o
^N^e^w^H^a^m^p^s^hⁱ^r^e⁴⁸⁹⁵⁵⁶⁶²⁵⁶⁸⁸⁷⁴⁸⁸²⁹^N^o
^N^e^w^Jers^ey¹⁶²³²²⁴²⁴⁴⁸⁸⁵⁵²⁶¹⁶^Y^e^s
^N^e^w^Mexⁱ^co²³¹³¹⁰³⁸⁹⁴⁶⁹⁵⁴⁸⁶²⁷^N^o
^N^e^w^Y^o^rk⁴¹⁴⁵⁰¹⁶⁹¹⁸²⁵⁹⁶⁴^1,059^N^o
^N^o^rt^h^C^a^rolⁱⁿ^a¹⁸¹²³⁶²⁷²²⁹⁷³²⁴³⁴⁹^Y^e^s
^N^o^rt^h^D^a^k^o^t^a²⁸²³⁷⁸⁴⁷⁷⁵⁷³⁶⁷⁰⁷⁶⁷^Y^e^s
^O^hⁱ^o²²³³⁰⁵³⁷³⁴⁶¹⁵³⁹⁶⁰⁰^N^o
^O^k^l^a^h^o^m^a¹⁸⁰²²⁵²⁹²³⁶¹⁴²²⁴⁸³^Y^e^s^.^In^creas^e
^{paid as}^{a n}^oⁿ^-
^c^a^s^{h vo}^uc^he^r^.
^O^r^eg^on³¹⁰³⁹⁵⁴⁶⁰⁵⁶⁵⁶⁶⁰⁷⁵⁵^N^o
^Penⁿ^s^y^l^v^aⁿⁱ^a²¹⁵³³⁰⁴²¹⁵¹⁴⁶⁰⁷⁶⁸⁷^N^o
^R^h^{ode Is}^l^aⁿ^d³²⁷⁴⁴⁹⁵⁵⁴⁶³⁴⁷¹⁴⁷⁹⁴^N^o
^S^o^u^t^h^C^a^rolⁱⁿ^a¹²¹¹⁶³²⁰⁵²⁴⁸²⁹⁰³³³^Y^e^s
^S^o^u^t^h^D^a^k^o^t^a³⁶⁰⁴⁴¹⁴⁹³⁵⁴⁴⁵⁹⁶⁶⁴⁹^N^o
^T^eⁿⁿ^e^s^s^e^e⁹⁵¹⁴²¹⁸⁵²²⁶²⁶⁴³⁰⁵^Y^e^s
^T^e^x^a^s⁹⁰¹⁸⁸²¹⁷²⁶¹²⁹⁰³³³^N^o
^U^t^ah²⁷⁴³⁸⁰⁴⁷⁴⁵⁵⁵⁶³²⁶⁹⁶^N^o
^V^e^rm^on^t⁵⁰³⁶⁰⁴⁷⁰⁹⁷⁹⁵⁸⁸⁵⁹⁴⁶^N^o
^Vⁱ^rgⁱⁿⁱ^a²⁴²³²³³⁸⁹⁴⁵¹⁵³⁷⁵⁸⁷^Y^e^s
^Was^hⁱⁿ^g^t^on³⁴⁹⁴⁴⁰⁵⁴⁶⁶⁴²⁷⁴⁰⁸⁴¹^N^o
^Wes^t^Vⁱ^rgⁱⁿⁱ^a³⁴⁹⁴⁰¹⁴⁵³⁵¹²⁵⁶⁰⁶¹³^N^o
^Wⁱ^sc^oⁿ^sin^b⁰⁶⁷³⁶⁷³⁶⁷³⁶⁷³⁶⁷³ⁿ^/^a
^Wy^omⁱⁿ^g¹⁹⁵³²⁰³⁴⁰³⁴⁰³⁶⁰³⁶⁰^Y^e^s
^S^o^u^rce:^T^a^{ble prepared by}^th^{e C}^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice (C}^R^S^{) bas}^e^{d on}^{a s}^u^rv^ey^of^s^t^ate
^T^A^{NF cas}^h^as^sⁱ^s^t^an^{ce prog}^ram^s^.
^{a. A}^f^a^m^ily^sⁱ^{ze of}^on^{e is}^{a preg}ⁿ^aⁿ^t^w^o^m^aⁿ^.^T^w^{o s}^t^ates^{, C}^o^lorado^an^d^T^e^x^a^s^h^a^v^e^s^e^parate^pay^m^en^t
^s^c^h^e^du^les^f^o^{r cas}^es^th^{at con}^s^is^{t of}^{a preg}ⁿ^aⁿ^t^w^o^m^aⁿ^.
^{b. Wi}^s^c^on^sⁱⁿ^doesⁿ^o^t^pay^{a ben}^e^fⁱ^t^uⁿ^d^{er i}^t^s^reg^u^l^{ar W-}^{2 (T}^A^N^F⁾^prog^ram^f^o^{r a}^pregⁿ^aⁿ^t^w^o^m^aⁿ
^w^ithⁿ^o^o^t^h^e^r^elig^ib^{le d}^e^p^eⁿ^d^en^{t ch}^ild^r^eⁿ^.

Maximum Combined TANF and Food Stamps
Most households composed entirely of TANF recipients are automatically
eligible for food stamps without regard to food stamp tests of need. The combined
cash welfare benefit plus the food stamp benefit used to be referred to as the
“guarantee” level of income that a family eligible for welfare would receive without
work. In the post-welfare reform era of benefits conditioned upon work, the
combined cash and food stamp benefit refers to the amount of income a family would
receive if it had no other countable income and complied with all program
requirements (including work requirements).
Table 2 shows the maximum monthly combined benefit from TANF and food
stamps in each state on January 1, 2004. The food stamp program treats TANF
benefits as income and reduces food stamp benefits accordingly. The calculations
in the table assume no earned income and no food stamp excess-shelter deduction.²
Hawaii and Alaska have higher food stamp benefit amounts than other jurisdictions.
Table 2. Maximum Combined TANF and Food Stamps Benefit
for Single Parent Families of One to Six Persons
on January 1, 2004
^Fa^m^ily^size
^St^a^t^e¹²³⁴⁵⁶
^A^l^abam^a^$296^$432^$561^$682^$797^$936
^Al^a^s^k^a⁵⁹⁵⁹⁵⁰^1,153^1,344^1,520^1,724
^Arⁱ^z^oⁿ^a³²⁴⁴⁹¹⁶⁵⁴⁸⁰³⁹⁴⁷^1,116
^A^r^ka^nsa^s²²²⁴¹²⁵⁵⁴⁶⁸⁴⁸⁰⁴⁹⁵⁵
^Calif^o^rⁿⁱ^a⁴²⁵⁶⁹⁶⁹⁰⁴^1,098^1,272^1,473
^Co^lo^r^a^d^o³³¹⁴⁹⁵⁶⁶⁰⁸¹³⁹⁶³^1,136
^Co^nne^c^tⁱ^c^ut⁴⁶²⁶⁵⁸⁸⁵⁶^1,029^1,189^1,377
^Delaw^a^re³²¹⁴⁸⁸⁶⁴⁷⁷⁹⁶⁹³⁷^1,104
^D.C³⁴⁸⁵⁰⁷⁶⁷⁶⁸³⁵⁹⁷⁷^1,162
^Flo^r^id^a³⁰⁷⁴⁶⁷⁶²³⁷⁶⁶⁹⁰²^1,064
^Geo^r^gⁱ^a²⁸⁹⁴⁶³⁶⁰⁷⁷⁴²⁸⁶⁹^1,010
^Haw^aⁱⁱ⁵⁰¹⁷⁵⁹^1,008^1,239^1,454^1,705
^Idah^o³⁹⁷⁵¹⁵⁶²⁷⁷²⁷⁸²¹⁹³⁹
^I^llin^oⁱ^s³³⁷⁵⁰³⁶⁸⁸⁸¹⁵⁹⁶¹^1,123
^In^di^an^a²⁷⁸⁴⁵⁹⁶¹²⁷⁵³⁸⁸⁸^1,047
^Iow^a³⁰⁹⁵⁵¹⁷⁰⁹⁸⁵⁷⁹⁸⁸^1,150
^Kan^s^as³⁶⁸⁵⁴⁵⁷¹¹⁸⁵⁹⁹⁹⁵^1,156

² The excess shelter deduction is for excessively high, but not all, shelter costs. Generally,
these are costs above about one-third of a household’s total cash income.

^Fa^m^ily^size
^St^a^t^e¹²³⁴⁵⁶
^K^e^nt^uc^ky³³⁵⁴⁷⁶⁶¹³⁷³⁸⁸⁵⁷^1,001
^Lo^ui^sⁱ^aⁿ^a²⁶³⁴³⁰⁵⁷⁹⁷¹⁰⁸³³⁹⁷⁹
^Main^e³⁴²⁵⁵³⁷⁵⁰⁹³⁸^1,117^1,322
^Mary^lan^d³³⁰⁵⁶²⁷⁴⁵⁹¹⁵^1,072^1,237
^M^a^ssa^c^huse^t^t^s⁴⁷³⁶⁶¹⁸⁴³^1,010^1,173^1,361
^Mich^ig^an³⁷⁴⁵⁵⁸⁷³²⁹⁰⁵^1,066^1,277
^Mⁱ^nne^so^t^a³⁵⁶⁶⁰⁵⁷⁸³⁹⁴⁵^1,092^1,264
^Mⁱ^ssissip^pⁱ²⁵¹⁴⁰¹⁵³⁰⁶⁴⁷⁷⁵⁷⁸⁹²
^Mⁱ^sso^urⁱ²⁷⁶⁴⁶³⁶¹⁵⁷⁵⁰⁸⁷⁶^1,025
^Mon^t^an^a³³⁵⁵⁰⁷⁶⁷³⁸²⁷⁹⁷⁵^1,148
^Neb^r^ask^a³³⁶⁵⁰⁴⁶⁶⁶⁸¹⁵⁹⁵⁸^1,127
^Nev^a^d^a³⁴²⁵⁰¹⁶⁵⁴⁷⁹⁶⁹³⁰^1,090
^N^e^w^H^a^m^p^s^hⁱ^r^e⁵²³⁶⁸⁸⁸⁴⁸⁹⁹²^1,128^1,303
^New^J^e^rsey²⁹⁴⁵²⁴⁷⁰⁸⁸⁵²⁹⁹¹^1,154
^New^Mexⁱ^co³⁴²⁵¹⁶⁶⁸³⁸³⁹⁹⁸⁸^1,162
^New^Yo^rk⁴⁷¹⁶⁴⁹⁸⁹⁴^1,088^1,279^1,464
^Nort^h^C^a^rolⁱⁿ^a³⁰⁷⁴⁶⁴⁶⁰¹⁷¹⁹⁸³¹⁹⁶⁷
^No^rth^Dak^o^ta³⁷⁸⁵⁶³⁷⁴⁵⁹¹²^1,073^1,260
^Oh^io³³⁷⁵¹²⁶⁷²⁸³³⁹⁸²^1,143
^Ok^lah^o^m^a³⁰⁷⁴⁵⁶⁶¹⁵⁷⁶³⁹⁰⁰^1,061
^Oreg^oⁿ³⁹⁸⁵⁷⁵⁷³³⁹⁰⁶^1,066^1,251
^P^e^nnsy^l^vaⁿⁱ^a³³¹⁵³⁰⁷⁰⁵⁸⁷¹^1,029^1,204
^R^h^{ode Is}^l^aⁿ^d⁴¹⁰⁶¹³⁷⁹⁹⁹⁵⁵^1,104^1,279
^So^ut^{h Ca}^r^o^lⁱⁿ^a²⁶²⁴¹³⁵⁵⁴⁶⁸⁴⁸⁰⁷⁹⁵⁶
^So^ut^{h D}^a^ko^t^a⁴³³⁶⁰⁷⁷⁵⁶⁸⁹²^1,021^1,177
^T^e^nne^sse^e²³⁶³⁹⁸⁵⁴⁰⁶⁶⁹⁷⁸⁹⁹³⁶
^Te^x^a^s²³¹⁴³⁰⁵⁶³⁶⁹³⁸⁰⁷⁹⁵⁶
^Utah³⁷³⁵⁶⁵⁷⁴³⁸⁹⁹^1,047^1,210
^Verm^oⁿ^t⁵³³⁷²²⁹⁰⁷^1,067^1,224^1,385
^Vir^gⁱⁿ^ia³⁵⁰⁵²⁵⁶⁸³⁸²⁶⁹⁸⁰^1,134
^W^a^shi^ngt^oⁿ⁴²⁵⁶⁰⁷⁷⁹³⁹⁶⁰^1,122^1,312
^W^e^{st Vir}^gⁱⁿ^ia⁴²⁵⁵⁷⁹⁷²⁸⁸⁶⁹⁹⁹⁶^1,152
^Wⁱ^sc^oⁿ^sin^a¹⁴¹⁷⁷⁰⁸⁸²⁹⁸²^1,075^1,194
^Wy^omⁱⁿ^g³¹⁷⁵²³⁶⁴⁹⁷⁴⁹⁸⁵⁶⁹⁷⁵
^Source:^T^a^{ble p}^r^e^p^a^r^e^d^b^y^th^{e C}^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice (C}^R^S^{) bas}^e^{d on}^{a s}^u^rv^ey^of^s^t^ate
^T^A^{NF cas}^h^as^sⁱ^s^t^an^{ce prog}^ram^s^.

^No^te^{: F}^{ood s}^t^am^{p calcu}^lati^oⁿ^s^a^ssum^e^t^h^{at th}^{e f}^a^m^ily^doesⁿ^o^{t receiv}^e^an^ex^ces^s^s^h^{elter cos}^t
^d^e^d^u^ctioⁿ^.^Iⁿ^v^e^r^y^lo^w^T^A^NF^b^eⁿ^e^f^it^states,^co^m^bⁱⁿ^ed^b^eⁿ^e^f^{its sh}^o^wⁿ^r^e^f^l^{ect th}^{e m}^a^xⁱ^m^u^m^f^o^o^d
^s^t^a^m^p^allo^tm^en^{t f}^o^r^th^{e f}^a^m^ily^{size, b}^u^{t in}^so^m^e^{states th}^{e ex}^{cess sh}^elter^d^e^d^u^ctioⁿ^w^o^u^l^d
ⁱⁿ^creas^{e ben}^e^fⁱ^t^s^by^u^p^t^o^{$83 m}^oⁿ^t^h^l^y^—^m^o^{re i}ⁿ^A^l^as^k^a^an^{d H}^a^w^aⁱⁱ^.
^{a. W}ⁱ^scoⁿ^sin^h^a^{s n}^o^oⁿ^e-^p^e^r^s^oⁿ^f^a^m^iliesⁱⁿ^{its T}^A^{NF p}^r^o^g^r^a^m^.^P^r^egⁿ^aⁿ^t^w^o^m^eⁿ^w^ith^o^u^{t ch}^ild^r^eⁿ^ar^e
ⁱⁿ^elig^ib^le.
Changes in Maximum Benefits from 1996 to 2004
During discussions of welfare reform in the mid-1990s, it was feared by some
that states facing limited federal funding would engage in a “race-to-the bottom” by
cutting benefit amounts. Some thought that a state that had higher benefit levels than
its neighbors would attract welfare families from other states. These factors would
set in motion a competitive downward spiral, the “race-to-the bottom,” of benefit
levels among the states.
This “race-to-the-bottom” did not happen. Twenty-four states paid the same
maximum monthly benefits in January 2004 as they did in 1996; however, a few
states did reduce benefits. Hawaii reduced maximum benefits for families with an
adult expected to work. Benefits were also cut in the District of Columbia, Idaho,
Montana, Oklahoma, and Wyoming.
Table 3 shows maximum benefits for a family of three (headed by a single
adult) by state for July 1996 to January 2004. Under TANF, benefits generally have
fallen in real value. Twenty-one states have increased benefit levels during the July

1996 to January 2004 period. In eight of these (Alabama, California, Louisiana,

Maryland, Mississippi, New York, West Virginia, and Wisconsin) benefits increased
by more than the increases in prices between July 1996 and January 2004.
Table 3. TANF Maximum Monthly Benefits for a Family of Three
(Single Parent Families): 1996-2004
^%^R^e^al^ch^an^ge
^from^Ju^l^y^{96 to}
^S^t^ate^J^u^l^{y 96}^Ju^l^y⁹⁸^Jan^{. 00}^Jan^{. 02}^Jan^{. 04}^Jan^{. 2004}
Alabama 164 164 164 164 215 11.14%
Alaska 923 923 923 923 923 -15.23%
Arizona 347 347 347 347 347 -15.23%
Arka nsas 204 204 204 204 204 -15.23%
California 596 565 626 679 704 0.14%
Colorado 356 356 356 356 356 -15.23%
Connecticut 636 636 636 636 636 -15.23%
Delaware 338 338 338 338 338 -15.23%
District of
Columbia 415 379 379 379 379 -22.58%
Florida 303 303 303 303 303 -15.23%
Georgi a 280 280 280 280 280 -15.23%

^%^R^e^al^ch^an^ge
^from^Ju^l^y^{96 to}
^S^t^ate^J^u^l^{y 96}^Ju^l^y⁹⁸^Jan^{. 00}^Jan^{. 02}^Jan^{. 04}^Jan^{. 2004}
Hawaii 712570570570570-32.13%
Idaho 317 276 293 293 309 -17.36%
Illinois 377 377 377 377 396 -10.95%
Indiana 288 288 288 288 288 -15.23%
Io wa 426 426 426 426 426 -15.23%
K a nsas 429 429 429 429 429 -15.23%
K e ntucky 262 262 262 262 289 -6.49%
Louisiana 190 190 190 240 240 7.08%
Maine 418 439 461 485 485 -1.64%
Maryland 3733884174724778.41%
Massachusetts 565 565 565 618 618 -7.27%
Michigan 459 459 459 459 459 -15.23%
Minnesota 532 532 532 532 532 -15.23%
Mississippi 120 120 170 170 170 20.10%
Missouri 292 292 292 292 292 -15.23%
Montana 438 461 469 494 375 -27.42%
Nebraska 364 364 364 364 364 -15.23%
Neva da 348 348 348 348 348 -15.23%
New Hampshire550550575600625-3.67%
New Jersey424424424424424-15.23%
New Mexico389439439389389-15.23%
New York5775775775776911.52%
North Carolina272272272272272-15.23%
North Dakota431440457477477-6.18%
Ohio 341 362 373 373 373 -7.27%
Oklahoma 307 292 292 292 292 -19.37%
Oregon 460 460 460 460 460 -15.23%
Pennsyl va nia 421 421 421 421 421 -15.23%
Rhode Island554554554554554-15.23%
South Carolina200201204205205-13.11%
South Dakota430430430469493-2.81%
T e nnessee 185 185 185 185 185 -15.23%
T e xas 188 188 201 201 217 -2.15%
Utah 416 451 451 474 474 -3.41%
V e rmont 633 656 708 709 709 -5.05%
V i rginia 354 354 354 389 389 -6.84%

^%^R^e^al^ch^an^ge
^from^Ju^l^y^{96 to}
^S^t^ate^J^u^l^{y 96}^Ju^l^y⁹⁸^Jan^{. 00}^Jan^{. 02}^Jan^{. 04}^Jan^{. 2004}
Washington 546 546 546 546 546 -15.23%
West Virginia25325332845345351.79%
Wisconsin 517 673 673 673 673 10.35%
Wyoming 360 340 340 340 340 -19.94%
^Source:^T^a^{ble prepared by}^th^e^C^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^al^R^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice (C}^R^S^{) bas}^e^{d on}^{a s}^u^rv^ey^of^th^{e s}^t^ate
^T^A^{NF cas}^h^as^sⁱ^s^t^an^{ce prog}^ram^s^.
^Note:^T^h^eⁱⁿ^fl^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^fact^{or u}^s^{ed t}^o^con^v^e^rt^Ju^l^y^{1996 dol}^l^a^rs^t^o^Jan^.^{2004 dol}^l^a^rs^w^a^s^1.1796
^(repres^en^tⁱⁿ^g^t^h^{e ch}^an^g^eⁱⁿ^t^h^{e C}^oⁿ^s^u^m^{er Pri}^{ce In}^dex^f^o^{r al}^l^U^r^ban^C^oⁿ^s^u^m^ers^f^r^om^Ju^l^y^{1996 t}^o^Jan^.
^2004).
From Welfare to Work: Eligibility and Benefit
Amounts
The preceding section described cash assistance benefits for families with no
income other than welfare. However, under TANF, more families are combining
cash assistance with work. This section describes the maximum level of earnings a
family may have and retain eligibility for TANF cash aid and shows how the TANF
benefit contributes to total family income as a recipient increases her work effort.
Income Eligibility
Federal law requires that TANF cash be paid to needy families with children,
and all states require that a family have income below specified income eligibility
thresholds to receive cash aid. All states except Ohio and Virginia also require that
a family have assets valued below a certain threshold; see Appendix A for a
discussion of TANF resource limits.
Determining if a family is financially eligible for TANF is often a complicated
process with considerable variation among the states. The majority of states (33)
have different income eligibility rules for initial eligibility (new applicants) and for
continued eligibility for families already enrolled. Most of the differences concern
the treatment of earnings. This report will focus on the rules for families already on
the rolls.
As was generally the case under AFDC, states may determine the eligibility
threshold for cash aid. Further, TANF does not specify federal rules for what types
of income — and how much of each type of income — must be counted in
determining eligibility for cash aid. In particular, states have developed a diverse set
of rules for the treatment of earnings.
Countable Income. Whether a family with a working member remains
eligible for cash assistance often depends on its circumstances: what type of income
it has, what types of expenses (for example, child care) it incurs, and how long

working recipients have been on the job. Most states base eligibility, at least in part,
on a family’s countable income. Countable income is the family’s income minus
deductions specified in a state’s program rules for working expenses and a portion
of earnings disregarded as an incentive to work.
Earnings Disregards. In most states, the maximum level of earnings a
family may have and retain eligibility for cash assistance depends on its benefit
amount and “earnings disregards.” Most states reduce benefits for families with
earnings, though the size of the benefit reduction varies by state. States generally do
not count some earnings when determining benefits, sometimes to compensate for
work expenses and sometimes as an incentive for recipients to get a job.
Under AFDC, federal law specified that earnings disregards were provided for
only a short period of time, so that soon after a family member went to work most³
families became ineligible for cash assistance. Under TANF, states are free to set
their own earnings disregards and, today, almost all jurisdictions have increased
rewards for recipients who work. State TANF programs generally disregard a sizable
share of earnings for at least a year, and some disregard 100% of earnings for new job
holders for the first few months. Higher earnings disregards increase the “exit point”
from TANF, the amount of income recipients can earn before cash benefits are
terminated. (Also, they raise the income eligibility entry point in the18 jurisdictions
that do not have different rules for treating the earnings of applicants.)
Gross Income Test.Some states have adopted a second income test to
determine whether a family with a working member remains eligible for benefits
based on gross income. These “gross income tests” cut off eligibility to a family at
a certain income level, generally without regard to its individual circumstances. That
is, a family is made ineligible at a certain level of income without regard to earnings
disregards that otherwise apply and any deductions allowed for expenses. Federal
AFDC law required states to impose a gross income test. TANF does not require
states to adopt a gross income test, but 26 have retained such tests in their programs.
Maximum Earnings Eligibility Thresholds. Table 4 provides TANF
benefit levels at zero income, earnings disregard rules, and the TANF “exit point” by
state for a family of three as of January 2004. It shows that 33 states now disregard
from 20% to 75% of all earnings in all months, and two states — Connecticut and
Virginia — disregard all earnings until total income reaches the poverty level. Five
states disregard 100% of earnings from one to three months. However, eight states
(three in all months, five after four-six months of work) use flat dollar disregards,
under which extra earnings reduce benefits.
Table 4 shows that in 10 states TANF benefits for a three-person family would
not end until gross earnings exceeded or came very close to the 2004 poverty
guideline of $1,272 monthly for a family of three: Alaska ($1,931 in the first 12

³ Under AFDC, earnings disregards were taken in the following order: both applicants and
recipients received a $90 work expense earnings disregard, then recipients received an
additional $30 earnings disregard for the first 12 months of employment. In the first four
months of employment, recipients also received an additional 33.33% earnings disregard.

months of work): California ($1,613); Colorado ($1,227 in the first 12 months of
work); Connecticut ($1,272); District of Columbia ($1,267); Hawaii, ($1,343); New
Hampshire ($1230); New York ($1,272 in New York City); Rhode Island, ($1,258);
and Virginia ($1,262). Higher or equal exit points exist in some other states, for
three to six months (see Delaware, Louisiana, North Dakota, and Texas).
At the other extreme are these low TANF-exit points: Alabama, $256 (after
three months); Mississippi, $441; and Georgia, $534 (after four months); and
Wyoming, $530.
The complexity and variation in policy can be illustrated by considering
hypothetical single-parent families with two children in five states: California,
Connecticut, Louisiana, and New York (New York City), and Virginia. Assume that
each has gross monthly earnings of $1,000. So long as the adult had not reached the
state’s time limit on benefits, the family in Connecticut would receive a full TANF
benefit of $636 monthly; in New York City, a reduced benefit of $245; in California,
a reduced benefit of $316. In Louisiana, the family would receive a full benefit of
$240 for six months in a lifetime, but would be ineligible for TANF after this period.
In Virginia, the family would receive a full benefit of $389 for the first four months
of work, a reduced benefit of $372 for the next eight months and thereafter a reduced
benefit of $342.
Table 4. TANF Maximum Monthly Benefits, Earnings
Disregards, and Exit Points for a Family of Three
(Single Parent Families), January 1, 2004
^Beⁿ^e^fi^t^E^a^rnⁱⁿ^gs^dⁱ^s^regard^e^d^{TANF ex}^it^po^int
^{at zero}^a^a^{nd w}^h^en^(gros^s^earnings⁾^b
^St^a^t^e^inco^m^e
Alabama$215100%, months 1-3;No limit, months 1-3
20% after 3 months$256 after 3 months
Alaska$923$150 + 33% of the rest,$1,961 year 1, dropping
year 1 to $1,363 by year 5
$150 + declining %,
years 2-5.
Arizona$347$90 + 30% of the rest$571
all months
Arkansas$20420% + 60% of the rest$696
all months
California$704$225 + 50% of the$1,613
rest all months
Colorado$35666.67% (up to 12$1,227 (for 12
cumulative months);cumulative months)
then use old AFDCdropping to $499 after 2
rules. See Delaware.years.

^Beⁿ^e^fi^t^E^a^rnⁱⁿ^gs^dⁱ^s^regard^e^d^{TANF ex}^it^po^int
^{at zero}^a^a^{nd w}^h^en^(gros^s^earnings⁾^b
^St^a^t^e^inco^m^e
Connecticut$636100% (up to poverty$1,272 gross earnings
guideline of $1,272)limit, all months
all months
Delaware$338Old AFDC rules:$1,520 months 1-4
$120 + 1/3 of the rest,$1,054 months 5-12
months 1-4; $120,
months 5-12; $90
thereafter
D.C.$379$160 + 66.67% of the$1,267
rest all months
Florida$303$200 +50% of the rest$786
all months
Georgia$280Old AFDC rules. See$740 months 1-4
Delaware$534 months 5-12
Hawaii$57020% + $200 + 36% of$1,343
the rest all months
Idaho$30940% all months$631
Illinois$39666.67% all months$1,185
Indiana $288 75% $1,148
Iowa$42620% + 50% of the$1,040
rest, all months
Kansas$429$90 + 40% of the rest,$788
all months
Kentucky$289100% for 2 months inNo limit, months 1 and
lifetime (time chosen2 (recipient assumed to
by recipient)make this choice)
$120 + 1/3 of the rest,$881 months 3-6
months 3-6, $628 months 7-14
$120 months 7-14
$90 thereafter
Louisiana$240$900 (6 months in$1,250, 6 months in
lifetime)lifetime. $350
$120 all other monthsthereafter.
Maine$485$108 plus 50% of the$1,023, gross income
rest, all monthstest, all months
Maryland$47740% all months$778
Massachusetts$618$120 + 50% of the$1,143 gross income
rest, all monthstest, all months

^Beⁿ^e^fi^t^E^a^rnⁱⁿ^gs^dⁱ^s^regard^e^d^{TANF ex}^it^po^int
^{at zero}^a^a^{nd w}^h^en^(gros^s^earnings⁾^b
^St^a^t^e^inco^m^e
Michigan$459^c $200 + 20% of the$761 (Wayne County)
rest, all months
Minnesota$532^d36% all months$914^d
Mississippi$170$90 all months$441
Missouri$29266.67% + $90 all$1,116
months
Montana$375$200 + 25% of the$700
rest, all months
Nebraska$36420% all months$751
Nevada$348100% months 1-3No limit, months 1-3
50% months 4-12$845 months 4-12
New Hampshire$62550% all months$1,230
New Jersey$424100%, 1^st full monthNo limit, first month
of work$848 after month 1
50% after month 1
New Mexico$389$125 + 50% of the^st$901 + (in the 1^st 24
rest. Plus, for the 1months) earnings from
24 months, all“excess” hours of work
earnings from work
hours above minimum
required
New York$691^e$90 + 51% of the rest$1,272 (New York City)
all months(100% of poverty-based,
gross income limit, all
months)
North Carolina$272100% months 1-3^fNo limit, months 1-3
(standard counties)$681 after 3 months
27.5% after 3 months
(all counties)
North Dakota$47727% or $180 (if$1,279 months 1-6
greater) plus:$984 months 7-9
50% months 1-6$852 months 10-13
35% months 7-9
25% months 10-13
Ohio$373$250 + 50% of the$976
rest, all months
Oklahoma$292$120 + 50% of the$684

rest, all months

^Beⁿ^e^fi^t^E^a^rnⁱⁿ^gs^dⁱ^s^regard^e^d^{TANF ex}^it^po^int
^{at zero}^a^a^{nd w}^h^en^(gros^s^earnings⁾^b
^St^a^t^e^inco^m^e
Oregon$46050% all months$616 gross income limit,
all months
Pennsylvania$42150% all months$822
Rhode Island$554$170 +50% of the$1,258
rest, all months
South Carolina$20550% months 1-4$1,174 gross income
$100 after month 4limit, months 1-4
$704 after 4 months
South Dakota$493$90 + 20% of the rest,$694
all months
Tennessee$185$150 all months$1,020
Texas$217$120 + (for 4 months)$1,727 months 1-4
90% of the rest, but$327 thereafter
disregard (including
the $120) cannot
exceed $1,400.
Utah$474$100 + 50% of the$1,050
rest, all months
Vermont$683^g$150 + 25% of the$1,082 (in Chittenden
rest, all monthsCounty)
Virginia$389Old AFDC rules used$1,252
to determine
countable income (see
Delaware). Countable
income is subtracted
from poverty
guideline. As long as
countable income +
full benefits (and
gross income alone)
are below the poverty
guideline of $1,252,
full benefits are paid.
Washington$54650% all months$1,072
West Virginia$45340% all months$755, gross income limit,
all months

^Beⁿ^e^fi^t^E^a^rnⁱⁿ^gs^dⁱ^s^regard^e^d^{TANF ex}^it^po^int
^{at zero}^a^a^{nd w}^h^en^(gros^s^earnings⁾^b
^St^a^t^e^inco^m^e
Wisconsin$673^hⁱNo disregards. Gross income limit:
$628Recipient cannot work115% of federal poverty
more than 29 hourslevel — $1,462
per week and remain
eligible for the
program. As long as
gross income test is
met and participants
fulfill work hour
rules, benefits are
paid based on number
of hours of
participation.
Wyoming$340$200 all months$530
^Source:^T^a^ble^prepared^by^th^e^C^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^al^R^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice (C}^R^S^{) bas}^e^{d on}^{a s}^u^rv^ey^of^th^{e s}^t^ates^.
^a.^Iⁿ^cas^es^w^h^{ere s}^t^at^es^dⁱ^fferen^tⁱ^a^t^e^b^e^t^w^een^f^a^m^ilie^s^req^uⁱ^red^t^o^w^o^rk^an^d^ex^em^p^t^fro^m^w^o^rk^,^t^hⁱ^s
^c^o^lumⁿ^sho^w^{s be}^ne^{fits fo}^{r the}^fo^rm^e^r^g^r^o^{up. S}ⁱ^m^ila^rly^,^w^h^e^r^e^sta^t^e^s^pa^y^hig^h^e^r^be^ne^fits^to^g^r^o^ups
^w^ith^g^r^e^a^t^e^r^ho^using^ne^e^d⁽ⁿ^o^ho^using^subsidy^,^no^sha^r^ing^o^f^ho^using^,^e^t^c^.⁾^this^c^o^lumⁿ^sho^w^s^the^s^e
^hig^h^e^r^a^m^o^unts.^Iⁿ^so^m^e^r^e^gⁱ^oⁿ^{s o}^f^so^m^e^sta^t^e^s^,^be^ne^fits^m^a^y^be^diffe^re^{nt fro}^m^tho^s^e^sho^w^{n he}^re^.
^Note:^T^a^b^l^e^t^a^k^e^sⁿ^o^acco^uⁿ^t^o^f^chⁱ^l^d^{care d}ⁱ^s^r^eg^ard^s^,^w^hⁱ^c^h^m^aⁿ^y^s^t^at^es^p^r^o^vⁱ^d^e^.^T^h^ey^w^o^u^l^d^rai^s^e
^e^x^{it po}^ints.
^b.^T^h^irty^-ⁿ^ine^j^u^risdic^tio^{ns pa}^y^no^be^ne^{fit sm}^a^lle^{r tha}ⁿ^{$10 m}^o^nthly^;^oⁿ^e^(No^r^{th Ca}^ro^lina⁾^pa^y^s^no^be^ne^fit
^sm^a^lle^{r tha}ⁿ^{$25 in m}^o^{st c}^o^untie^{s. T}^h^e^re^m^a^ining¹¹^s^t^a^t^e^s^do^no^{t im}^po^se^a^mⁱ^nim^u^m^be^ne^{fit to}
^qua^lify^fo^{r a}^c^t^ua^{l c}^a^s^{h (Ark}^aⁿ^sa^{s, I}^ndiaⁿ^a^,^Ne^w^Je^rse^y^{, Ne}^w^Me^xic^o^{, No}^{rth Da}^k^o^t^a^,^Co^nne^c^tic^ut,
^Illinoⁱ^{s, Minne}^so^ta^{, Mo}^ntaⁿ^a^,^W^e^{st V}ⁱ^r^g^inia^,^a^nd^Wⁱ^sc^oⁿ^sin)^{. Ca}^lc^ula^tio^{ns in the}^ta^ble^r^e^f^l^e^c^t^sta^t^e
^mⁱ^nim^u^m^be^ne^f^{it po}^lic^ie^{s, w}^h^ic^{h lo}^w^e^r^T^A^N^F^e^x^{it po}^ints.
^c.^W^a^yⁿ^{e C}^o^uⁿ^t^y^(Det^roⁱ^t⁾
^{d. Minne}^so^ta^c^o^m^b^ine^s^T^ANF^a^nd^fo^o^d^sta^m^psⁱⁿ^a^sing^le^be^ne^{fit. T}^h^{is num}^be^{r re}^fle^c^t^{s o}ⁿ^ly^the^c^a^s^h
^po^r^tio^{n o}^f^the^g^r^aⁿ^t.
^{e. New}^Yo^rk^Cⁱ^t^y
^f^.^Sta^nda^r^d^c^o^uⁿ^t^ie^{s o}^p^e^r^a^t^e^pr^o^g^r^a^m^{s unde}^r^sta^t^e^r^u^le^{s. I}ⁿ^a^dditio^{n, No}^r^t^{h Ca}^r^o^lina^’^{s pr}^o^g^r^a^m^a^llo^w^s
^c^e^r^ta^{in “e}^le^c^ting^c^o^untie^s”^to^ha^v^e^m^o^r^e^f^l^e^x^ibility^{in the}ⁱ^r^pr^o^g^r^a^m^r^u^l^e^s^.^“^E^le^c^ting^c^o^untie^s”
^de^cⁱ^de^w^h^e^t^he^{r to}^o^ffe^{r the}^thre^e^-^m^o^{nth 100% disre}^g^a^r^d.
^g^.^Chitte^nde^{n Co}^unty
^{h. Fo}^r^c^o^m^m^unity^se^r^v^ic^e⁽^a^{ll f}^a^m^ily^siz^e^s⁾^.
^{i. Fo}^r^pa^r^tic^ipa^tio^{n in W}^-^{2 tr}^aⁿ^sitio^{n pr}^o^g^r^a^m⁽^a^{ll f}^a^m^ily^siz^e^s⁾^.

Maximum Hours a Minimum Wage Earner Can Work and Retain
Eligibility for TANF. Another way to illustrate how states treat families with
earners is to consider a minimum wage worker and how many hours she may work
and remain eligible for TANF. That is, in how many states can a minimum wage
earner work 20 hours or 40 hours per week and remain eligible for TANF?
Table 5 shows the maximum number of hours per week a person earning the
minimum wage could work and still retain eligibility for TANF cash assistance as of
January 1, 2004. (For the dollar amounts by month of employment see Appendix B.)
In states where the minimum wage is above the federal $5.15 per hour, the higher
state minimum wage was used in the calculation. The information in the table is
based on the rules for a family of three (the average family size for those on cash
assistance). Because the rules for counting or disregarding earnings sometimes
change depending on how long a recipient has been working — states sometimes
have generous disregards of earnings for the first few months on the job — these
maximum hours are shown for months one through 13 on the job.
Most recipients working 20 hours per week remain eligible for TANF cash. The
table shows that all states except Mississippi allow a minimum wage earner, with a
family of three, working 20 hours per week to have her family remain on TANF in
the first month of employment. However, after the third month on a job, this family
would no longer be eligible for cash benefits in Alabama; after the fourth month on
a job, the family would no longer be eligible for cash benefits in Texas. After a year
working (month 13 on a job) a recipient remains eligible for some TANF cash in 46
jurisdictions.
On the other hand, TANF recipients working 40 hours a week often lose
eligibility for TANF cash — though in a majority of states TANF cash is still paid,
albeit in some states for a short period of time. In the first month on a job, a recipient
who gets a minimum wage job and works 40 hours per week remains eligible for
TANF cash assistance in 29 jurisdictions. However, after a year of work (month 13
on a job), she would remain eligible for TANF cash in only 17 jurisdictions.
Table 5. Maximum Hours per Week That a Minimum Wage
Earner Can Work and Retain Eligibility
for TANF Cash Assistance
(Based on January 2004 Benefit Levels and Minimum Wages)
^M^o^nt^{h o}ⁿ^a^j^o^b
^S^t^ate¹²³⁴⁵⁶⁷⁸⁹¹⁰¹¹¹²¹³
^A^l^abam^aⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^a¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹
^A^l^as^k^a⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁵⁷
^A^rⁱ^z^oⁿ^a²⁵²⁵²⁵²⁵²⁵²⁵²⁵²⁵²⁵²⁵²⁵²⁵²⁵
^A^r^k^aⁿ^s^as³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹
^C^a^lⁱ^f^o^rⁿⁱ^a⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵
^C^o^l^o^rado⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵³²
^C^oⁿⁿ^ectⁱ^c^u^t⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹

^M^o^nt^{h o}ⁿ^a^j^o^b
^S^t^ate¹²³⁴⁵⁶⁷⁸⁹¹⁰¹¹¹²¹³
^D^e^l^a^w^a^re⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁸
^{District o}^f⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷
^Co^lu^m^b^ia
^F^l^o^rⁱ^d^a³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵
^G^e^o^r^gⁱ^a³³³³³³³³²³²³²³²³²³²³²³²³²
^H^a^w^aⁱⁱ⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹
^I^d^a^h^o²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸
^I^llin^oⁱ^s⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹⁴⁹
^Iⁿ^dⁱ^aⁿ^a⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹
^Iow^a⁴⁶⁴⁶⁴⁶⁴⁶⁴⁶⁴⁶⁴⁶⁴⁶⁴⁶⁴⁶⁴⁶⁴⁶⁴⁶
^K^aⁿ^s^as³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵³⁵
^K^eⁿ^t^u^c^k^yⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^a³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸²⁸
^L^o^uⁱ^sⁱ^aⁿ^a⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵¹⁵
^M^aⁱⁿ^e³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷
^Mary^l^aⁿ^d³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴
^Mas^s^ach^u^s^et^t^s³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹³⁹
^Mi^chⁱ^g^an³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴
^Miⁿⁿ^e^s^o^t^a⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰
^Mi^s^sⁱ^s^sⁱ^ppi¹⁹¹⁹¹⁹¹⁹¹⁹¹⁹¹⁹¹⁹¹⁹¹⁹¹⁹¹⁹¹⁹
^Mⁱ^s^o^u^rⁱ⁵⁰⁵⁰⁵⁰⁵⁰⁵⁰⁵⁰⁵⁰⁵⁰⁵⁰⁵⁰⁵⁰⁵⁰¹⁶
^M^oⁿ^t^aⁿ^a³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹
^N^e^bras^k^a³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³
^N^e^v^a^d^aⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^a³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷¹⁹
^N^e^w^H^a^m^p^s^hⁱ^r^e⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵⁵
^N^e^w^J^e^r^s^e^yⁿ^/^a³⁸³⁸³⁸³⁸³⁸³⁸³⁸³⁸³⁸³⁸³⁸³⁸
^N^e^w^Mexⁱ^co⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰⁴⁰
^N^e^w^Y^o^rk⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷
^N^o^rt^h^C^a^rolⁱⁿ^aⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^a³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰
^N^o^rt^h^D^a^k^o^t^a⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁵⁷⁴⁴⁴⁴⁴⁴³⁸³⁸³⁸³⁸
^O^hⁱ^o⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³
^O^k^l^a^h^o^m^a³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰³⁰
^O^r^eg^on²⁰²⁰²⁰²⁰²⁰²⁰²⁰²⁰²⁰²⁰²⁰²⁰²⁰
^P^eⁿ^s^y^l^v^aⁿⁱ^a³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶³⁶
^R^h^{ode Is}^l^aⁿ^d⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³
^S^o^u^t^h^C^a^r^o^lⁱⁿ^a⁵²⁵²⁵²⁵²³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹
^S^o^u^t^h^D^a^k^o^t^a³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹³¹
^T^eⁿ^e^s^e⁴⁵⁴⁵⁴⁵⁴⁵⁴⁵⁴⁵⁴⁵⁴⁵⁴⁵⁴⁵⁴⁵⁴⁵⁴⁵
^T^e^x^a^s⁷⁷⁷⁷⁷⁷⁷⁷¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴¹⁴
^U^t^ah⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷⁴⁷
^V^e^r^m^oⁿ^t³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷³⁷
^Vⁱ^rgⁱⁿⁱ^a⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶⁵⁶
^Was^hⁱⁿ^g^t^on³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴³⁴
^Wes^t^Vⁱ^rgⁱⁿⁱ^a³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³³
^Wⁱ^s^c^oⁿ^sⁱⁿ²⁹²⁹²⁹²⁹²⁹²⁹²⁹²⁹²⁹²⁹²⁹²⁹²⁹
^W^y^o^mⁱⁿ^g²³²³²³²³²³²³²³²³²³²³²³²³²³
^Source:^C^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice (C}^R^S⁾^b^a^s^e^{d on}^{a s}^u^rv^ey^of^s^t^{ate T}^A^{NF cas}^h^as^sⁱ^s^t^an^ce
^prog^ram^s^{. Mi}ⁿⁱ^m^u^m^w^a^g^e^dat^a^by^s^t^at^{e are f}^r^om^t^h^{e D}^e^part^m^eⁿ^t^of^L^a^{bor (D}^oL^).

Family Income by Hours per Week of Work
Most states still base TANF cash welfare payments on the degree of a family’s
financial need, and reduce cash benefits for a family with nonwelfare income such
as earnings. That is, a one dollar increase in earnings often yields a family less than
a one dollar increase in total income. However, the combined family income of
families with the same work effort (20 hours per week, 40 hours per week) varies
widely by state depending on their TANF cash benefit amounts and how they count
the earnings of family workers.
Table 6 shows the net earned income, tax credits, food stamp benefits, and
TANF benefits for a family of three who begin working 20 hours per week at
minimum wage for one year. When a state has a minimum wage rate higher than the
national minimum wage, the state’s minimum wage is used in calculating earnings.
The net earnings column shows gross earnings less employee Federal Insurance
Contributions Act (FICA) taxes. The EITC column shows the effect of the EITC on
gross earnings.⁴ The TANF column shows the monthly benefit at month 13 of⁵
employment annualized. The food stamp column shows the annualized food stamp
benefit based upon monthly gross earnings and TANF benefits. The combined total
column shows the summation of income from the four previous columns. The
columns to the right show the respective dollar amounts on the left as a percent of the

2004 poverty threshold issued by the Department of Health and Human Services.

In month 13 of employment, no TANF benefits are paid to half-time minimum
wage workers in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Nevada. In seven
states — Alaska, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and
Vermont — the combined total exceeds the federal poverty threshold.
Table 7 shows the same information as Table 6, except that the worker is
employed for 40 hours per week for one year. At this level of income, 17 states pay
a TANF benefit for a family of three in month 13 on a job. Families in every state
have combined total incomes above the poverty threshold based on federally-
determined EITC and food stamp benefits. Earnings plus EITC and food stamps
yield an income for a family of three equal to 105% of the poverty threshold in the
48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia (Alaska and Hawaii have different
poverty thresholds). However, at this level of earned income, the largest component
of income is earnings, followed by EITC.

⁴ For more information on EITC, see CRS Report RS21477, The Earned Income Tax Credit:
Policy and Legislative Issues, by Christine Scott.
⁵ Benefits may be zero in some months. In Alabama, for example, a recipient working 20
hours per week at minimum wage would receive a TANF benefit only in months one
through four.

CRS-19
nnualized Earnings and Income from Selected Benefit Programs for a Single Parent with Two Children,
Working 20 Hours per Week at Minimum Wage, in the 13^th Month of Work, January 1, 2004
NetFoodCombined
earningsEITC as aTANF as astamps as atotal as a
NetFoodCombinedas a % of% of% of% of% of
e a r n i n gs EI TC TANF stamps total poverty poverty poverty poverty poverty
a $4,942 $2,141 $0 $3,648 $10,731 32% 14% 0% 23% 68%
a 6,862 2,972 7,920 1,932 19,686 35 15 40 10 100
ona 4,942 2,141 1,164 3,300 11,547 32 14 7 21 74
a nsas 4,942 2,141 2,448 2,904 12,435 32 14 16 19 79
6,478 2,806 6,288 1,356 16,928 41 18 40 9 108
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL32598} 4,942 2,141 2,064 3,024 12,171 32 14 13 19 78
^g/w 6,814 2,951 7,632 864 18,261 45 19 49 6 120
^s^.or 5,902 2,556 3,060 2,472 13,990 38 16 20 16 89
^le^ak
bia 5,902 2,556 3,048 2,484 13,990 38 16 19 16 89
^://wiki 4,942 2,141 2,160 3,000 12,243 32 14 14 19 78
^h^ttpi a 4,942 2,141 816 3,396 11,295 32 14 5 22 72
2,5985,0404,32017,95633142824100
4,942 2,141 1,452 3,204 11,739 32 14 9 20 75
5,278 2,286 2,844 2,700 13,108 35 15 19 18 86
4,942 2,141 2,112 3,012 12,207 32 14 13 19 78
4,942 2,141 2,964 2,760 12,807 32 14 19 18 82
nsas 4,942 2,141 2,580 2,868 12,531 32 14 16 18 80
ntucky 4,942 2,141 1,320 3,252 11,655 32 14 8 21 74
4,942 2,141 0 3,648 10,731 32 14 0 23 68
5,998 2,598 4,836 1,920 15,352 38 17 31 12 98
land 4,9422,1412,5082,89212,4833214161880

6,478 2,806 4,620 1,860 15,764 41 18 29 12 101

CRS-20
NetFoodCombined
earningsEITC as aTANF as astamps as atotal as a
NetFoodCombinedas a % of% of% of% of% of
e a r n i n gs EI TC TANF stamps total poverty poverty poverty poverty poverty
an 4,942 2,141 3,144 2,700 12,927 32 14 20 17 82
4,942 2,141 3,696 3,840 14,619 32 14 24 25 93
4,942 2,141 0 3,648 10,731 32 14 0 23 68
2,14103,64810,731321402368
4,942 2,141 2,280 2,964 12,327 32 14 15 19 79
a 4,942 2,141 3,048 2,724 12,855 32 14 19 17 82
a da 4,942 2,141 0 3,648 10,731 32 14 0 2 3 6 8
pshire 4,942 2,141 4,824 2,196 14,103 32 14 31 14 90
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL32598}e rsey 4,942 2,141 2,412 2,916 12,411 32 14 15 19 79
^g/w 4,942 2,141 2,736 2,820 12,639 32 14 17 18 81
^s^.or
^le^ak 4,942 2,141 6,192 1,788 15,063 32 14 40 11 96
4,942 2,141 1,320 3,252 11,655 32 14 8 21 74
^://wikiota 4,942 2,141 3,324 2,652 13,059 32 14 21 17 83
^h^ttp 4,942 2,141 3,300 2,652 13,035 32 14 21 17 83
lahoma 4,942 2,141 1,548 3,180 11,811 32 14 10 20 75
on 6,622 2,868 1,932 2,628 14,050 42 18 12 17 90
l va nia 4,942 2,141 2,376 2,928 12,387 32 14 15 19 79
s land 6,478 2,806 4,152 2,004 15,440 43 18 27 13 101
4,942 2,141 1,116 3,312 11,511 32 14 7 21 73
ota 4,942 2,141 2,496 2,892 12,471 32 14 16 18 80
nnessee 4,942 2,141 2,220 2,976 12,279 32 14 14 19 78
xas 4,942 2,141 0 3,648 10,731 32 14 0 23 68
4,942 2,141 4,740 2,220 14,043 32 14 30 14 90
rmont 6,478 2,806 4,596 1,872 15,752 43 18 30 12 103

CRS-21
NetFoodCombined
earningsEITC as aTANF as astamps as atotal as a
NetFoodCombinedas a % of% of% of% of% of
e a r n i n gs EI TC TANF stamps total poverty poverty poverty poverty poverty
inia 4,942 2,141 4,668 2,244 13,995 32 14 30 14 89
ton 6,872 2,976 2,820 2,292 14,960 45 20 19 15 98
i rginia 4,942 2,141 2,220 2,976 12,279 32 14 14 19 78
4,942 2,141 2,760 2,820 12,663 32 14 18 18 81
oming 4,942 2,141 1,128 3,300 11,511 32 14 7 21 73
^C^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice (C}^R^S^{) bas}^e^{d on}^{a s}^u^rv^ey^of^s^t^{ate T}^A^{NF cas}^h^as^sⁱ^s^t^an^{ce prog}^ram^s^.

ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL32598}
^g/w
^s^.or
^le^ak
^://wiki
^h^ttp

CRS-22
nnualized Earnings and Income from Selected Benefit Programs for a Single Parent with Two Children,
Working 40 Hours per Week at Minimum Wage, in the 13^th Month of Work, January 1, 2004
NetFoodCombined
earningsEITC TANFstampstotal
FoodCombinedas a % ofas a % ofas a % ofas a % ofas a % of
e EarningsEITCTANFstampstotalpovertypovertypovertypovertypoverty
a $9,885 $4,282 $0 $2,364 $16,531 63% 27% 0% 15% 105%
a 13,724 4,127 3,708 1,404 22,963 70 21 19 7 117
ona 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
a nsas 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
4,3002,77273220,7608327185132
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL32598} 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
^g/w 13,628 4,149 7,632 0 25,409 87 27 49 0 162
^s^.or 11,804 4,300 0 1,860 17,964 75 27 0 12 115
^le^ak
bia 11,804 4,300 924 1,584 18,612 75 27 6 10 119
^://wiki 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
^h^ttpi a 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
4,3001,7163,76821,78067241021121
9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
10,557 4,300 936 1,908 17,701 67 27 6 12 113
9,885 4,282 780 2,124 17,071 63 27 5 14 109
9,885 4,282 828 2,112 17,107 63 27 5 1 3 109
nsas 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
ntucky 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
11,996 4,300 0 1,812 18,108 77 27 0 12 116
land 9,8854,28202,36416,5316327015105

12,956 4,300 0 1,560 18,816 83 27 0 10 120

CRS-23
NetFoodCombined
earningsEITC TANFstampstotal
FoodCombinedas a % ofas a % ofas a % ofas a % ofas a % of
e EarningsEITCTANFstampstotalpovertypovertypovertypovertypoverty
an 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
9,885 4,282 372 3,840 18,379 63 27 2 25 117
9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
4,28202,36416,5316327015105
9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
a 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
a da 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 1 5 105
pshire 9,885 4,282 2,148 1,716 18,031 63 27 14 11 115
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL32598}e rsey 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
^g/w 9,885 4,282 2,196 1,704 18,067 63 27 14 11 115
^s^.or
^le^ak 9,885 4,282 3,576 1,284 19,027 63 27 23 8 121
9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
^://wikio ta 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 1 5 105
^h^ttp 9,885 4,282 624 2,172 16,963 63 27 4 14 108
lahoma 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 1 5 105
on 13,244 4,237 0 1,488 18,969 85 27 0 9 121
l va nia 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
s land 12,956 4,300 648 1,368 19,272 83 27 4 9 123
9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
ota 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
nnessee 9,885 4,282 1,656 1,860 17,683 63 27 11 12 113
xas 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
9,885 4,282 2,064 1,740 17,971 63 27 13 11 115
rmont 12,956 4,300 0 1,560 18,816 83 27 0 10 120

CRS-24
NetFoodCombined
earningsEITC TANFstampstotal
FoodCombinedas a % ofas a % ofas a % ofas a % ofas a % of
e EarningsEITCTANFstampstotalpovertypovertypovertypovertypoverty
inia 9,885 4,282 4,668 960 19,795 63 27 30 6 126
ton 13,743 4,123 0 1,356 19,222 87 26 0 9 123
i rginia 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
oming 9,885 4,282 0 2,364 16,531 63 27 0 15 105
^C^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice (C}^R^S^{) bas}^e^{d on}^{a s}^u^rv^ey^of^s^t^{ate T}^A^{NF cas}^h^as^sⁱ^s^t^an^{ce prog}^ram^s^.

ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL32598}
^g/w
^s^.or
^le^ak
^://wiki
^h^ttp

Earnings Disregards and TANF Work Participation Standards
The adoption of more generous earnings disregards — and consequent
expansion of eligibility for families on the rolls who have earnings — is one of the
most profound changes states made to their cash assistance programs once freed from
federal rules for how they must count the earnings of a family with a working adult.
These more generous disregards have been seen as increasing incentives to work: the
more generous disregards mean that the implicit “tax rate” on earnings (reduced
welfare benefits as earnings increase) is reduced. More generous earnings disregards
also have been seen as part of strategies to help “make work pay,” as continued cash
welfare benefits supplement the earnings of low wage earners. From the state’s
perspective the more generous earnings disregards also have a practical consequence:
they help states meet TANF work participation standards.
TANF law requires states to meet minimum standards of work participation, and
the share of all families (with an adult) who must engage in specified work activities
for minimum hours weekly climbed from a statutory level of 25% in FY1997 to 50%
in FY2002 and following years. One of the specified work activities creditable
toward states meeting work participation standards is “unsubsidized employment,”
combining welfare and work. This differs from the pre-1996 program, the Job
Opportunity and Basic Skills (JOBS) training program, which counted “unsubsidized
employment” only in the first month on a job toward participation standards. In other
months, recipients who worked 35 hours per week or more were excluded from the
participation rate calculation. Under pre-1996 federal rules, recipients who went to
work soon became ineligible for cash assistance.
With the adoption of more generous earnings disregards under TANF, the
proportion of adults who combine welfare with unsubsidized work has risen sharply
from 11% in FY1996 to 26% in FY2002. Combining welfare and work is by far the
most common activity among TANF adults — job search ranks a distant second in
terms of the percent of TANF adults engaged in an activity at 6%.
Though the work reward policies of states help them meet TANF work
participation requirements, reduce disincentives to work, and help “make work pay,”
research shows that they tend to increase the amount of time families spend on cash
welfare.⁶ Thus, the work reward policies implicitly conflict with TANF time limits
on cash assistance and the federal law’s statutory goal of ending dependence on
government benefits.⁷ Longer use of cash welfare, even by parents with jobs,
sometimes is viewed as prolonging welfare “dependence.”

⁶ See U.S. Congress, House Ways and Means Committee, 2004 Green Book, Appendix L,
“Assessing the Effects of Welfare Reform Initiatives,” Mar. 2004.
⁷ TANF sets a 60-month time limit on the use of federal funds to pay cash assistance to a
family with an adult. To continue the work incentive for more than 60 months, states must
use their own funds — though state funds spent for families who passed the time limit are
counted toward meeting TANF’s maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement.

Appendix A. Resource Limits
Under AFDC, states could not set their countable resource limit above $1,000
for both applicants and recipients. Under TANF, states have the flexibility to
establish their own financial eligibility guidelines, and most states have raised their
resource limits. Of the states that raised their resource limits, the majority have
adopted rules similar to that of the food stamp program. The resource limit for most
families in the food stamp program is $2,000 per family.
Although the definition of what constitutes a resource varies from state to state,
it generally includes savings accounts and other liquid assets. States do not count the
primary residence against the resource limit and some states disregard life insurance
policies as an asset. A number of states allow recipients to set up individual
development accounts (IDAs) for specific purposes, such as education, home
purchase, and business start-up capital. The savings in these accounts may be
excluded. Additionally, eight states exclude all vehicles from countable assets and
21 states exclude one vehicle per family. Other states exclude a portion of the auto’s
value.
Table A1. TANF Resource Limits and Vehicle Disregards,
January 2004
StateResource limitsVehicle disregards
AlabamaApplicants and recipients:All vehicles
Household without aged or disabled
member: $2,000
Household with an aged or disabled
member: $3,000
AlaskaApplicants and recipients:Any vehicle used for
Household without a member 60+family transportation, to
years: $2,000produce self-employment
Household w/ a member 60+ years:income, or participate in
$3,000an approved work activity
ArizonaApplicants and recipients: $2,000All vehicles
ArkansasApplicants and recipients: $3,0001 vehicle
CaliforniaApplicants and recipients:$4,650 of fair market
Household without aged or disabledvalue
member: $2,000
Household with an aged or disabled
member: $3,000
ColoradoApplicants and recipients: $2,0001 vehicle
ConnecticutApplicants and recipients: $3,000$9,500 of equity value
DelawareApplicants and recipients: $1,000$4,650 of equity value
District ofApplicants and recipients:All vehicles

ColumbiaHousehold without a member 60+
years: $2,000
Household with a member 60+ years:
$3,000

StateResource limitsVehicle disregards
FloridaApplicants and recipients: $2,000$8,500 of equity value
GeorgiaApplicants and recipients: $1,000Employed, engaged in
training, or actively
seeking employment:
$4,650 of equity value
Not employed, in training,
or actively seeking
employment: $1,500 of
equity value
HawaiiApplicants and recipients: $5,000All vehicles
IdahoApplicants and recipients: $2,000$4,650 of fair market
value
IllinoisApplicants and recipients:1 vehicle
Family size 1: $2,000
Family size 2: $3,000
Family size 3: $3,050
Family size 4: $3,100
Family size 5: $3,150
Family size 6: $3,200
Family size 7: $3,250
Family size 8: $3,300
IndianaApplicants only: $1,000$5,000 of equity value
Recipients only: $1,500
IowaApplicants only: $2,000$4,115 of equity value for
Recipients only: $5,000each adult
KansasApplicants and recipients: $2,000All vehicles
KentuckyApplicants and recipients: $2,000All vehicles
LouisianaApplicants and recipients: $2,000All vehicles
MaineApplicants and recipients: $2,0001 vehicle
MarylandApplicants and recipients:All vehicles
$2,000
MassachusettsApplicants and recipients: $2,500$5,000 of equity value and
$10,000 of “fair market
value”
MichiganApplicants and recipients: $3,000All vehicles
MinnesotaApplicants only: $2,000$7,500 of loan value
Recipients only: $5,000
MississippiApplicants and recipients: $2,000Any vehicle used for
personal and household
transportation
MissouriApplicants only: $1,0001 vehicle
Recipients only: $5,0002nd vehicle: $1,500 equity
value
MontanaApplicants and recipients: $3,0001 vehicle
NebraskaApplicants and recipients:1 vehicle
One person: $4,000
Two or more persons: $6,000
NevadaApplicants and recipients:1 vehicle

$2,000

StateResource limitsVehicle disregards
NewApplicants and recipients:1 vehicle per adult
HampshireReceived benefits in last 6 months:
$2,000
Applicants only: Received no benefits
in last 6 months: $1,000
New JerseyApplicants and recipients: $2,000$9,500 of fair market
value 2nd vehicle: $4,650
of fair market value
New MexicoApplicants and recipients: Liquid1 vehicle in areas of
resource limit of $1,500. Non-liquidpublic transportation. In
resource limit of $2,000other areas, 1 vehicle for
each adult.
New YorkApplicants and recipients:$9,300 of fair market
Household without 60+ member: value if used for
$2,000employment or seeking
Household with a 60+ member: employment (localities
$3,000have the option to set this
limit higher);
$4,650 of fair market
value otherwise.
North CarolinaApplicants and recipients: $3,0001 vehicle per adult
North DakotaApplicants and recipients:1 vehicle
One person: $3,000; Two people:
$6,000, plus $25 per additional family
member
OhioNo resource limitNo resource limit
OklahomaApplicants and recipients: $1,000$5,000 of equity value
OregonApplicants and recipients:$10,000 of equity value
Someone in JOBS program: $10,000
No one in JOBS program: $2,500
PennsylvaniaApplicants and recipients:$1,0001 vehicle
Rhode IslandApplicants and recipients: $1,000One vehicle per adult, not
to exceed two vehicles per
household
South CarolinaApplicants and recipients: $2,5001 vehicle per driver
South DakotaApplicants and recipients: $2,0001 vehicle^nd
2 vehicle: $4,650 of fair
market value
TennesseeApplicants and recipients: $2,000$4,600 of equity value
TexasApplicants and recipients:$4,650 of fair market
$1,000value

StateResource limitsVehicle disregards
UtahApplicants and recipients: $2,000Household with a disabled
member/
transportation:
1 vehicle
No disabled member /
transportation: $8,000 of
equity value
VermontApplicants and recipients: $1,0001 vehicle per adult with a
maximum of 2 vehicles
per household
VirginiaNo resource test No resource test
WashingtonApplicants and recipients: $1,000$5,000 of equity value
West VirginiaApplicants and recipients: $2,0001 vehicle
WyomingApplicants and recipients: $2,500$12,000 of fair market
value
WisconsinApplicants and recipients: $2,500$10,000 of equity value
WyomingApplicants and recipients: $2,500$12,000 of fair market
value
^Source:^T^a^{ble prepared by}^th^{e C}^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice (C}^R^S^{) bas}^e^d^oⁿ^a^s^u^r^v^e^y^of^s^t^ate
^T^A^{NF cas}^h^as^sⁱ^s^t^an^{ce prog}^ram^s^.

CRS-30
Appendix B. TANF Exit Points, Monthly Earnings That End Eligibility, Family of Three,
January 1, 2004
($)
^e^123456789¹⁰¹¹²¹³
^aⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^a²⁵⁶²⁵⁶²⁵⁶²⁵⁶²⁵⁶²⁵⁶²⁵⁶²⁵⁶²⁵⁶²⁵⁶
^k^a^1,961^1,961^1,961^1,961^1,961^1,961^1,961^1,961^1,961^1,961^1,961^1,961^1,768
^z^on^a⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹⁵⁷¹
^aⁿ^s^as⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶⁶⁹⁶
ⁱ^f^ornⁱ^a¹^,613^1,613^1,613^1,613^1,613^1,⁶¹³^1,613^1,613^1,613^1,613^1,613^1,613^1,613
^l^o^rado^1,227^1,227^1,227^1,227^1,227^1,²²⁷^1,227^1,227^1,227^1,227^1,227^1,227⁷³³
ⁿⁿ^ectⁱ^c^u^t^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,²⁷²^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL32598}^l^a^w^a^re^1,520^1,520^1,520^1,520^1,054^1,⁰⁵⁴^1,054^1,054^1,054^1,054^1,054^1,054^1,024^t^ri^ct^of^C^o^l^u^m^bⁱ^a^1,267^1,267^1,267^1,267^1,267^1,267^1,267^1,267^1,²⁶⁷^1,267^1,267^1,267^1,267
^g/w
^s^.or^d^a⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶⁷⁸⁶
^le^ak^orgⁱ^a⁷⁴⁰⁷⁴⁰⁷⁴⁰⁷⁴⁰⁵³⁴⁵³⁴⁵³⁴⁵³⁴⁵³⁴⁵³⁴⁵³⁴⁵³⁴⁵⁰⁴
^w^aⁱⁱ^1,343^1,343^1,343^1,343^1,343^1,343^1,343^1,343^1,343^1,343^1,343^1,343^1,343
^://wiki^o⁶³¹⁶³¹⁶³¹⁶³¹⁶³¹⁶³¹⁶³¹⁶³¹⁶³¹⁶³¹⁶³¹⁶³¹⁶³¹
^h^ttp^oⁱ^s¹^,1⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵¹^,¹⁸⁵
^an^a¹^,148^1,148^1,148^1,148^1,148^1,¹⁴⁸^1,148^1,148^1,148^1,148^1,148^1,148^1,148
^a^1,040^1,040^1,040^1,040^1,040^1,040^1,040^1,040^1,040^1,040^1,040^1,040^1,040
ⁿ^s^as⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸⁷⁸⁸
ⁿ^t^u^c^k^yⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^a⁸⁸¹⁸⁸¹⁸⁸¹⁸⁸¹⁶²⁸⁶²⁸⁶²⁸⁶²⁸⁶²⁸⁶²⁸⁶²⁸
ⁱ^sⁱ^an^a¹^,250^1,250^1,250^1,250^1,250^1,250³⁵⁰³⁵⁰³⁵⁰³⁵⁰³⁵⁰³⁵⁰³⁵⁰
ⁿ^e¹^,023^1,023^1,023^1,023^1,023^1,023^1,023^1,023^1,023^1,023^1,023^1,023^1,023
^l^aⁿ^d⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸⁷⁷⁸
^s^ach^u^s^et^t^s^1,143^1,143^1,143^1,143^1,143^1,143^1,143^1,143^1,143^1,143^1,143^1,143^1,143
^chⁱ^g^an⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹⁷⁶¹
ⁿⁿ^e^s^o^t^a⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴⁹¹⁴
^s^sⁱ^s^sⁱ^ppi⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹⁴⁴¹

CRS-31
^e^123456789¹⁰¹¹²¹³
^s^s^o^u^rⁱ¹^,116^1,116^1,116^1,116^1,116^1,¹¹⁶^1,116^1,116^1,116^1,116^1,116^1,116^1,116
^t^an^a⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰⁷⁰⁰
^bras^k^a⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹⁷⁵¹
^v^a^daⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^a⁸⁴⁵⁸⁴⁵⁸⁴⁵⁸⁴⁵⁸⁴⁵⁸⁴⁵⁸⁴⁵⁸⁴⁵⁸⁴⁵⁴²⁸
^w^H^a^m^p^s^hⁱ^r^e¹^,230^1,230^1,230^1,230^1,230^1,230^1,230^1,230^1,230^1,230^1,230^1,230^1,230
^w^Jers^eyⁿ^/^a⁸⁴⁸⁸⁴⁸⁸⁴⁸⁸⁴⁸⁸⁴⁸⁸⁴⁸⁸⁴⁸⁸⁴⁸⁸⁴⁸⁸⁴⁸⁸⁴⁸⁸⁴⁸
^w^Mexⁱ^co⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹⁹⁰¹
^w^Y^o^rk^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,²⁷²^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272^1,272
^rt^h^C^a^rolⁱⁿ^aⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^aⁿ^/^a⁶⁸¹⁶⁸¹⁶⁸¹⁶⁸¹⁶⁸¹⁶⁸¹⁶⁸¹⁶⁸¹⁶⁸¹⁶⁸¹
^rt^h^D^a^k^o^t^a^1,279^1,279^1,279^1,279^1,279^1,279⁹⁸⁴⁹⁸⁴⁹⁸⁴⁸⁵²⁸⁵²⁸⁵²⁸⁵²
ⁱ^o⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶⁹⁷⁶
ⁱ^{ki/CRS-RL32598}^l^a^h^o^m^a⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴⁶⁸⁴
^g/w^on⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶⁶¹⁶
^s^.orⁿ^s^y^l^v^aⁿⁱ^a⁸²²⁸²²⁸²²⁸²²⁸²²⁸²²⁸²²⁸²²⁸²²⁸²²⁸²²⁸²²⁸²²
^le^ak^l^aⁿ^d^1,258^1,258^1,258^1,258^1,258^1,258^1,258^1,258^1,258^1,258^1,258^1,258^1,258
^://wiki^t^h^C^a^rolⁱⁿ^a¹^,174^1,174^1,174^1,174⁷⁰⁴⁷⁰⁴⁷⁰⁴⁷⁰⁴⁷⁰⁴⁷⁰⁴⁷⁰⁴⁷⁰⁴⁷⁰⁴
^h^ttp^t^h^D^a^k^o^t^a⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴⁶⁹⁴
ⁿ^e^s^s^e^e¹^,020^1,020^1,020^1,020^1,020^1,⁰²⁰^1,020^1,020^1,020^1,020^1,020^1,020^1,020
^a^s¹^,727^1,727^1,727^1,727³²⁷³²⁷³²⁷³²⁷³²⁷³²⁷³²⁷³²⁷³²⁷
^1,050^1,050^1,050^1,050^1,050^1,050^1,050^1,050^1,050^1,050^1,050^1,050^1,050
^rm^on^t¹^,082^1,082^1,082^1,082^1,082^1,⁰⁸²^1,082^1,082^1,082^1,082^1,082^1,082^1,082
ⁱⁿⁱ^a^1,252^1,252^1,252^1,252^1,252^1,²⁵²^1,252^1,252^1,252^1,252^1,252^1,252^1,252
^hⁱⁿ^g^t^on^1,072^1,072^1,072^1,072^1,072^1,⁰⁷²^1,072^1,072^1,072^1,072^1,072^1,072^1,072
^t^Vⁱ^rgⁱⁿⁱ^a⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵⁷⁵⁵
^s^c^on^sⁱⁿ¹^,462^1,462^1,462^1,462^1,462^1,⁴⁶²^1,462^1,462^1,462^1,462^1,462^1,462^1,462
^omⁱⁿ^g⁵³⁰⁵³⁰⁵³⁰⁵³⁰⁵³⁰⁵³⁰⁵³⁰⁵³⁰⁵³⁰⁵³⁰⁵³⁰⁵³⁰⁵³⁰
^C^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^Serv^{ice (C}^R^S^{) bas}^e^{d on}^{a s}^u^rv^ey^of^s^t^{ate T}^A^{NF cas}^h^as^sⁱ^s^t^an^{ce prog}^ram^s^.

Appendix C. State Benefit Computation Methods
The formula for computing benefits varies among the states. This appendix
provides a description of benefit computation formulas. Most states pay reduced
benefits to families with nonwelfare income. Generally, countable income is
subtracted from a dollar standard (called the “payment standard”) to determine
benefits. The most common benefit computation formula subtracts countable income
from a payment standard, and the benefit amount is the difference between the
payment standard and income. However, some states have maximum benefit
payments that constrain benefit payment; others pay a percentage of the difference
between the state’s payment standard and countable income. Table C1 provides a
typology of computation methods used by states in their TANF cash assistance
programs.

Table C1. Benefit Computation Methods Used by States for
TANF Cash Assistance, January 2004
^Ben^e^{fit =}^Ben^e^{fit = th}^e^Ben^e^{fit =}^Ben^e^{fit = th}^e^O^t^her^benefⁱ^t
^paym^e^nt^le^sse^{r o}^f^th^e^paym^e^nt^le^sse^{r o}^f^th^e^com^put^atⁱ^oⁿ
^s^t^andar^{d -}^paym^e^nt^s^t^andar^{d -}^paym^e^nt^m^e^t^hods
^count^abl^e^s^t^andar^{d -}^count^abl^e^s^t^andar^{d -}
ⁱⁿ^co^me^count^abl^eⁱⁿ^co^{me *}^count^abl^e
ⁱⁿ^co^{me o}^r^th^e^r^a^t^abl^eⁱⁿ^co^{me *}
^ma^ximu^m^r^e^ductⁱ^on^r^a^t^abl^e
^b^eⁿ^e^fit^r^e^ductⁱ^{on or}^t^h^e
^ma^ximu^m
^benefⁱ^t
^A^l^abam^a^Geo^r^gⁱ^a^Nort^h^C^a^rolⁱⁿ^a^Al^a^s^k^a^A^r^ka^nsa^s
^Arⁱ^z^oⁿ^a^Main^e^So^ut^{h Ca}^r^o^lⁱⁿ^a^Delaw^a^re^Co^nne^c^tⁱ^c^ut
^Calif^o^rⁿⁱ^a^Mⁱ^nne^so^t^a^Co^lo^r^a^d^o^Vir^gⁱⁿ^ia
^{District o}^f^Neb^r^ask^a^K^e^nt^uc^ky
^Co^lu^m^b^ia^No^rth^Dak^o^ta^Mⁱ^ssissip^pⁱ
^Flo^r^id^a^T^e^nne^sse^e
^Haw^aⁱⁱ
^Idah^o
^I^llin^oⁱ^s
^In^di^an^a
^Iow^a
^Kan^s^as
^Lo^ui^sⁱ^aⁿ^a
^Mary^lan^d
^M^a^ssa^c^huse^t^t^s
^Mich^ig^an
^Mⁱ^sso^urⁱ
^Mon^t^an^a
^Nev^a^d^a
^New^Ham^p^sh^ire
^New^J^e^rsey
^New^Mexⁱ^co
^New^Yo^rk
^Oh^io
^Ok^lah^o^m^a
^Oreg^oⁿ
^P^e^nnsy^l^vaⁿⁱ^a
^R^h^{ode Is}^l^aⁿ^d
^So^ut^{h D}^a^ko^t^a
^Te^x^a^s
^Utah
^Verm^oⁿ^t
^W^a^shi^ngt^oⁿ
^W^e^{st Vir}^gⁱⁿ^ia
^Wy^omⁱⁿ^g
^Source:^C^oⁿ^g^r^es^sⁱ^on^{al R}^e^s^earch^S^e^r^vⁱ^c^e^(C^R^S^{) bas}^e^{d on}^{a s}^u^rv^ey^of^s^t^{ate T}^A^{NF cas}^h^as^sⁱ^s^t^an^ce
^prog^ram^s^.