Legislative Issue

NCCSD Position

Discontinuance of Assignment of TANF Child Support to States CSIA and Pride stipulate that the assignment covers only child support accrued during the period that the family receives TANF. Pre-assistance arrearage would be eliminated. The bills also give states the option to discontinue assistance assignments in effect on 9/30/97. If a state chooses to discontinue the child support assignment, the state may distribute collections for such assignment to the family. States also would have the option to discontinue pre-assistance arrearage assignments in effect after 9/30/97 and before the implementation date of this provision. If a state chooses to discontinue the child support assignment, the state may distribute collections from such assignment to the family. Both bills allow the states the option to elect to implement this provision earlier . HR4 House retains the current law

NCCSD Resolution on Child Support Distribution Reform –June 5, 2002 · Limit the maximum assignment of support rights by families receiving TANF to the lesser of: (a) unreimbursed public assistance or (b) at the option of the state, the amount owed as child support for the period of time the family receives TANF by eliminating the requirement that families assign pre-assistance arrears. Letter to Dr. Heller – September 26, 2003 “On behalf of the National Council of Child Support Directors’ (NCCSD), I would like to convey to you the reasons why NCCSD prefers the proposal on distribution introduced by Senator Olympia Snowe, rather than the proposal that is currently supported by the Administration.” “The Snowe proposal mandates allowing the family to keep pre-assistance arrears from a date certain and forward. This is good public policy, and will assist families who rely on the government for help. This mandate requires the states to take an important first step towards family self-sufficiency.”

Legislative Issue

NCCSD Position

Optional State Pass Through of Child Support Collections to TANF Families: CSIA and PRIDE: For families receiving assistance from a state (TANF or foster care) it requires the federal government to waive its share of child support collections, up to $400 per month for a family with one child, and $600 per month for a family with two or more children, if the state chooses to pass this child support through to the family. As in current law, disregarded pass through amounts count as TANF MOE expenditures. HR04 requires the federal government to waive up to the greater of a $50 increase in an already existing state pass-through, or $100.

Resolution on Child Support Distribution Reform –June 5, 2002 · Authorize a state option to distribute to families on TANF any portion of the state-assigned share of current support. · Require the federal government to fully participate in the costs of passing through child support to TANF families, by providing that the federal government waive its share of child support collections to the extent that a state chooses to pass through its share of support and disregards such amounts from affecting TANF eligibility or benefits Letter to Dr. Heller – September 26, 2003 “Federal participation in existing pass-through costs will reward states that are doing the right thing, and help states maintain existing pass-through policies. Without federal participation in the costs, some states are considering eliminating existing pass-throughs. Again, the key is flexibility, to allow the states to provide more support to assistance families in years when states’ budgets can afford. With fiscal relief provided for the pass-through, state legislators are more likely to consider expanded distribution.”

Legislative Issue

NCCSD Position

Discontinuance of IRS Tax Intercept Collections Going to States to Offset Costs and Instead Sending Directly to Former TANF Families: CSIA provides an option to states to eliminate the special treatment of child support arrearages through the federal income tax refund offset program and direct those collections to be paid to the family first. To the extent that the arrearage amount payable to former TANF families in any given month exceeds that amount that would have been payable to the family under current law, the State can elect to have the amount paid to the family considered an expenditure for MOE. In addition, the Child Support Enforcement State Plan includes an election by the State to include whether it is using the new option to pass through all arrearage payments to former TANF families without paying the Federal Government its share of such collections or whether it chooses to maintain the current distribution method. No later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this legislation, the Secretary, consulting with the states, must establish the procedures to be used to make estimates of excess costs associated with the new funding option. PRIDE also gives states the option to eliminate the special treatment of child support collection through the federal tax offset program. If a state chose such an option, it would retain its assignment rights, but these collections would be paid first to families. HR04 would give states that option to pay all collected support to former TANF families and extinguish state assignment rights. Under CSIA and PRIDE, but not HR04, states could count expanded distribution of child support to families toward state TANF MOE.

Resolution on Child Support Distribution Reform –June 5, 2002 · Provide additional financial support for former TANF families by providing a state option that all collections, in excess of the amount of current support, be applied first to the arrears owed to the family. This proposal would direct more arrears to families no longer receiving assistance under the TANF program by giving states the option to eliminate the federal tax offset exception. · Provide alternative funding sources to offset the loss of the retained collections, including authorizing states to use TANF funds to pay for (or to count towards TANF maintenance of effort requirements) the child support collections that the state would provide to families to help states replace lost program funding. Letter to Dr. Heller – September 26, 2003 “The Snowe proposal recognizes that with many states in severe budget crises, while these states want to move towards family self-sufficiency rather than cost-recovery, they need to move in that direction in increments. Therefore, the Snowe proposal allows a state to wait to exercise the option to give IRS offset collections to former TANF families prior to the state. The combination of the mandate, and this option allows a state to give more support to families (the pre-assistance arrears) without taking away all of the collections necessary to support the program at this time (the IRS offset). As state budgets improve, more states will be able to move towards giving these monies to the families first.”

Legislative Issue	NCCSD Position
Lower threshold amount for Passport Denial: CSIA, PRIDE and HR04 all authorize the denial, revocation or restriction of passports to non-custodial parents whose child support arrearages exceed $2,500.	Resolution on Passport Denial – June 4, 2002 Congress amend federal law to lower the arrears threshold criteria for inclusion in the Passport Denial Program from $5,000 to $2,500. The U.S. Department of State Passport Services implement procedures for the immediate revocation of passports for those delinquent non-custodial parents who exceed the threshold in arrearages owed.
Use of Tax Refund Intercept Program to Collect past Due Child Support on Behalf of Children Who Are Not Minors: CSIA allows the use of this program to collect arrearages on behalf of non-welfare children who are no longer minors. HR04 and PRIDE also contain this provision.	Resolution on Expanding Tax Intercept for Non-Welfare Adult Children – February 15, 2004 Congress amend federal law to expand IRS tax refund intercept program to collect past due child support from delinquent parents for non-welfare children after reaching the age of majority. Allow states to supplement their remedies on behalf for adult non-welfare children, and close this loophole that allows some parents to escape their responsibility.
Garnishment of Veteran’s Benefits: CSIA provides for veteran’s disability compensation benefits to be intercepted for child support, if the veteran is in arrears (although not spousal support, unless these payments are a result of retirement benefits being waived). PRIDE and HR04 also provide this if the veteran is over 60 days in arrears.	Resolution on Garnishment of Veteran’s Benefits – February 15, 2004 Congress amend current law to allow the garnishment of a veteran’s disability compensation benefit for the non-payment of child support. Treat all parents who fail to pay child support equally by closing this exception to veteran’s benefits.

Legislative Issue	NCCSD Position
UDC Report by OCSE to Congress: CSIA requires that within 6 months of enactment the Secretary must submit a report to Congress on UDC. This is the same in PRIDE and HR04.	Letter to Dr. Heller December 19, 2003 Excerpt - We recognize that the federal Office of Child Support Enforcement will be required to report to Congress on UDC, once pending legislation is passed.   Like you, NCCSD wants to ensure that the report to Congress reflects that our states have worked diligently to ensure prompt distribution of collections to families and to reduce UDC.  To that end, we seek to continue our partnership with your office to work toward an appropriate national goal for UDC that focuses on continuous improvement.
Expand Sharing of New Hire Information to Assist Unemployment Compensation Programs: CSIA,PRIDE, and HR4 all have provisions which would authorize information from the National Directory of New Hires to be used in order to detect fraud in Unemployment compensation	NCCSD Takes No Position on this Issue
Increase Rates to States for Short-term Training of Staff Of Certain Child Welfare Agencies: CSIA provides a payment rate increase for this short-term training. Neither PRIDE nor HR04 have this provision.	NCCSD Takes No Position on this Issue

Legislative Issue	NCCSD Position
Expand use of Federal Administrative Offset to Social Security Benefits: The federal administrative offset of debt program through the Secretary of the Treasury is expanded to allow limited offset of Social Security benefits. This expansion is contained within CSIA, PRIDE and HR04.	NCCSD Takes No Position on this Issue
Maintain Technical Assistance Funding Levels: CSIA, PRIDE, and HR4 all have provisions to freeze technical assistance funding at least at fiscal year 2002 levels to ensure sufficient funds are available for these purposes even as the federal share of collections declines.	NCCSD Takes No Position on this Issue
Maintain Federal Parent Locator Service Funding levels: CSIA, PRIDE, and HR4 all have provisions to freeze federal funding for this service at least at 2002 levels even as the federal share of collections declines.	NCCSD Takes No Position on this Issue
Use of Electronic Disbursement of Child Support Payments to Families: CSIA encourages states to implement EFT/EBT disbursement of child support, in order to save costs of postage, check preparation, and provide additional security of payments. Effective date of 2008. Neither PRIDE nor HRO4 have this provision.	Recommendations on Electronic Disbursement of Child Support Payments – February 15, 2004 NCCSD supports the use electronic disbursement of child support payments as a cost saving and customer service addition to the program. However, NCCSD strongly recommends a minor amendment. Instead of requiring all payments going through the program, some flexibility for exceptions should be allowed. Section 307 should be amended to remove the word “all” or allow for a minimal percentage of state-designated exemptions from this requirement. Exceptions should be allowed in situations where a custodial parent is physically or mentally handicapped, or any other situations, such as recognizing urban and rural factors, which states deem to be appropriate exemptions. As written, the law would preclude regulations that currently allow a federal agency to disburse payments electronically, but allow for exemptions. See 31CFR 208.4 Waivers.

Legislative Issue	NCCSD Position
Optional Expansion of State Distribution Units: This provision of CSIA grants the state the option of having all child support cases with withholding by employers paid through one central location, regardless of whether the order was issued before or after January 1, 1994. Neither PRIDE nor HRO4 have this provision.	Resolution on Optional Expansion of State Distribution Units – February 15, 2004 · NCCSD supports the optional expansion of State Distribution Units to include payments by Wage Withholding established prior to January 1, 1994. · Employers would benefit because this change in current law would be consistent with the intent of PRWORA to allow employers to send all child support payments to one location. · States would benefit in that they would receive federal financial participation to include pre-1994 payments in their current centralized process. · Children would benefit, because child support programs can better monitor all wage withholding payments made through a central location, and monitoring processes and expenses would not have to be duplicated.
Implementation of Medical Support Performance Measure: This provision of CSIA would raise the FFP program rate for medical support establishment and enforcement to 90% from the current rate of 66%, in order to increase activities related to medical support. Neither PRIDE nor HRO4 have this provision.	Resolution on Medical Support – June 6, 2001 This resolution included a number of provisions including: · Recommend that the medical support measure not be incorporated into the performance measure system and tied to funding at this time, · Recommend that the development and implementation of any medical support performance measure should be phased in to allow the states to implement the MCSWG’s recommendations, · Request enhanced 90 percent FFP targeted to IV-D implementation of medical support requirements for a limited 5-year period to ensure timely and consistent implementation of any of the MCSWG’s recommendations that require state child support agencies to assume new responsibilities, and

Legislative Issue	NCCSD Position
Optional Opt Out of IV-D Services in Lieu of Application: CSIA would allow a state, at its option, to provide monitoring and enforcement of child support orders without the requirement of a written application for services, so long as there is a provision allowing the custodial parent the option to decline services. Presently a waiver must be required, and all states that have applied for a waiver have received one. Neither PRIDE nor HRO4 have this provision.	Resolution on Optional Opt for IV-D Services in Lieu of Application – February 15, 2004 · NCSSD supports allowing states to choose to allow custodial parents to opt out of IV-D child support enforcement services in lieu of filing an application. · A Texas pilot program has confirmed that (1) custodial parents are more likely to use the program to protect their children, in an opt out process; and that (2) enforcement remedies are much more effective when used as soon as payments cease instead of later when a custodial parent applies for services long after payments have ceased.
Mandatory Fee: CSIA does not contain a provision regarding a mandated fee. HR04 includes a new $25 annual fee for never-TANF cases that receive more than $500 collected support in the year. PRIDE does not include this fee.	Resolution on $25 Annual Fee - June 4 2002 Congress reject the budget proposal to assess the $25 annual user fee on families who have never received assistance under a state program funded under part A, Title IV, of the Social Security Act.
Mandatory Review and Adjustment: CSIA does not contain a provision regarding mandatory review and adjustment. HRO4 and PRIDE both require states every 3 years to review and adjust child support order of parents receiving TANF.	Resolution Regarding Mandatory Review and Adjustment – June 4, 2002 · NCCSD supports current law on parents’ and states’ rights and responsibilities with regard to review and adjustment. This law includes: · NCCSD recommends that OCSE conduct research on states’ existing review and adjustment policies to identify best practices and to analyze the efficacy of such reviews.

Legislative Issue	NCCSD Position
Interception of Gaming Winnings: CSIA does not contain a provision regarding interception of gambling winnings, nor does HR04. PRIDE would authorize the Department of HHS to intercept gambling winnings of child support obligors. PRIDE would require gambling establishments to provide information to HHS to conduct data matches and must withhold support in the same manner that they withhold IRS tax debt.	Resolution and Recommendations on Interception of Gaming Winnings – February 15, 2004 · NCCSD supports authorizing the Department of HHS to match data with gaming institutions to intercept winnings to apply to past due child support. · Currently, gaming institutions withhold taxes for payouts over $600.00 and their withholding process should be amended to require the withholding of past due child support in the same manner. · This remedy would augment the already proven success of states intercepting lottery winnings, and would minimize impact on the gaming industry by a single match provided by OCSE, instead of multiple state lists.
Seizure of Assets Held by Multi-State Financial Institutions: CSIA does not contain a provision regarding this subject, nor does HR04. PRIDE would authorize HHS to perform data matches and to seize assets held by multi-state institutions, which would be transmitted to the state for distribution, HHS would provide notice of due process rights.	Resolution and Recommendations on Multi-State Financial Institutions Data Match – February 26, 2004 · Although NCCSD supports the FIDM and the MS-FIDM process, NCSSD recommends slowing the development of further federal legislation until a standard process that states can implement be defined and a standard form is developed and tested. · Congress should clarify and strengthen the intent of cooperation expected between states and financial institutions for full faith and credit. · OCSE should develop regulations to clearly establish a process in interstate cases, including the development of a standard transmittal form from states to financial institutions.
Insurance Data Matches: CSIA does not contain a provision on this subject matter, nor does HR04. PRIDE would authorize HHS to conduct data matching of insurance claims, settlements, awards and payments for state enforcement.	Resolution on Insurance Data Matches – February 15, 2004 · The Secretary of HHS, through FPLS, should have the authority to match insurance information, including claims, settlements, awards, and payments with non-payers of child support to secure payment of child support. · States should be able to opt out if they are short of resources to participate or if they already participate in a similar program. · All federal statutes should be reviewed for consistency to ensure authority to lien and levy across state lines, and that all insurance companies must honor that authority.

Legislative Issue

NCCSD Position

UIFSA and FFCCSOA: CSIA does not deal with this subject matter, nor does HR04. However, PRIDE would amend both of these bills in an effort to streamline enforcement.

Resolution on UIFSA 2001 - July 16, 2002 · Congress should amend section 466(f) of the Social Security Act to require every state to enact the 2001 version of UIFSA by October 1, 2004, or by the end of the first full quarter after the end of the first legislative session begun after the congressional amendment, whichever is later. · The Secretary of Health and Human Services, pending such congressional action, should use current law, including any existing exemption authority, to exempt States that have passed the 2001 amendments to UIFSA from the current state plan requirement regarding passage of the 1996 version of UIFSA. If the state has adopted the 2001 amendments verbatim, OCSE should provide an expedited automatic exemption based on the state's enactment. · Congress should also make minor amendments to the Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act (FFCCSOA) to ensure that the two Acts are consistent.

Legislative Issue	NCCSD Position
Garnishment of Longshoreman Benefits: CSIA is silent on this issue as is HRO4. PRIDE would allow garnishment of benefits issued under the Longshore and Harbor Worker’s Compensation Act.	NCCSD Position Paper on Federal Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation – April 17, 2003 The Federal Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (the Act), which essentially is a federal workers' compensation law for persons working in/on shipyards docks/ships, contains what appears to be an absolute, non-waivable (apparently by action or inaction) prohibition of garnishment of benefits under the Act. (33 USC §916) PROPOSAL: Section 916 should be amended to allow attachment or assignment for payment of child support.
Tribal and contractor data access: CSIA is silent on this issue as is HR04. PRIDE would require the Treasure Department to disclose certain tax return data to tribal child support agencies and state contractors. In addition it would include Indian tribes and tribal organizations as “authorized persons” for purposes of accessing data through the FPLS.	Resolution on Confidentiality of IRS Information - April 4, 2002 There are a number of provisions in this resolution including the following: Congress amend Section 6103 of 26 U.S.C. and sections 653, 663, and 664 42 U.S.C. to expand the definition of which agents of the Child Support Enforcement Agency are entitled to receive IRS information for purposes related to child support enforcement, as authorized under Title IV, Part D, of the Social Security Act and to allow such information to be disclosed to authorized agents for limited purposes necessary for the administration of the Title IV-D program

Legislative Issue	NCCSD Position
Timing of Corrective Action Year for Finding of Unreliable Data: CSIA does not contain a provision on this subject matter, nor does HR04. PRIDE would clarify the timing of the corrective action year for states in noncompliance with child support requirements.	NCCSD Recommendations regarding DRA and Penalty Provisions - June 19, 2003 Regulatory and/or Statutory Changes · NCCSD supports the change of timing of the corrective action year for state non-compliance. Current law penalizes states, because the corrective action year begins running before a state has been informed of needed changes. The change in timing would allow a state a full year to take corrective action, which is consistent with corrective action periods for other findings. The year would begin October 1 of the fiscal year following the receipt of the noncompliance finding. A full year would ensure that only appropriate penalties are levied. · As an example, -- under existing statute, the potential corrective action year for FFY 2003 started on October 1, 2003. The Data Reliability audit began on February 1, 2004, which means a report may not be received until June, 2004. That gives the state only until September 30, 2005 – a three-month period – to modify their automated system, retrain workers, and correct data entry. Under the new proposal, the corrective action period would begin on October 1 immediately following the receipt of the report.
Ban on Recovery of Medicaid Costs for Certain Births: CSIA only. The state should not use the IV-D program to collect any amount owed to the State by reason of costs incurred to the State under the State Plan approved under Title XIX for the birth of a child for whom support rights have been assigned.	NCCSD Takes No Position on this Issue

Legislative Issue	NCCSD Position
Sharing of New Hire Information with the Department of Education and reimbursement of Secretary’s costs: PRIDE only. The proposal makes legislative language governing the Department of Education’s access to the National Directory of New Hires consistent with general reimbursement language that applies to other entities. Thus, the Secretary of Education is to reimburse the HHS Secretary for any costs incurred by the HHS Secretary in providing requested new hires information.	NCCSD Takes No Position on this Issue
Option for States to Establish a new Child Support Interstate Case in Response to Another State’s Request for Assistance: PRIDE only. Allows an assisting state to establish a child support interstate