Social Security withdrew the Minimum Living Income from a woman and demanded a refund of 5,169.23 euros, considering that she had stopped meeting one of the essential requirements to maintain the benefit. The reason was that, after receiving an inheritance, his assets exceeded the maximum limit allowed to continue receiving this aid. In this way, the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid agrees with Social Security, which means the extinction of the Minimum Living Income as well as the obligation to repay the amounts unduly collected.
The woman had requested the Minimum Living Income on July 28, 2020 and Social Security recognized it by resolution of February 1, 2021, with effect from June 1, 2020 and a monthly amount of 469.93 euros. The problem is that, months later, Social Security reviewed its economic situation with the data provided by the Tax Agency and with them it was agreed to extinguish the benefit with effect from January 1, 2021. That is, with the complete and definitive withdrawal of the aid.
The problem was in the heritage. According to the ruling, in the 2020 financial year, the plaintiff had, not counting her habitual residence, a total asset of 79,119.83 euros, of which 3,910.02 euros corresponded to bank balances and 75,209.84 euros to real estate. That figure exceeded the maximum threshold required by the rule, set at 43,196.40 euros in his case. For this reason, in addition to withdrawing the aid, Social Security demanded that he return what he received between January and November 2021.
The non-compliant beneficiary appealed, explaining that, when she requested the IMV, she had not yet accessed the assets inherited from her mother and that she could not foresee that she would not comply with the requirements. He also alleged that the granting of the aid was due to an error by the Administration and that reimbursement should not be required for that reason.
The inheritance raised his assets above the legal maximum
Given these allegations, the TSJ of Madrid rejects the appeal and endorses the actions of Social Security. The Chamber recalls that, to collect the IMV, it is not enough to have a low income, but it is also necessary not to exceed a certain net worth. At this point, the law establishes that “the situation of economic vulnerability will not be appreciated” when the beneficiary has a net worth greater than the legal limit, also making it clear that real estate is included in this calculation, “excluding habitual residence.”
The court also rules out that there was an error by the INSS that prevented the money from being claimed. The ruling explains that the 2020 tax data could not be verified until the following year, once provided by the Treasury. For this reason, it concludes that there was no arbitrary action by the Administration and that it was appropriate to extinguish the aid and claim the amounts collected since January 2021. In fact, remember that article 15.2 of Law 19/2021 that regulates the Minimum Living Income requires any change that affects the maintenance of the benefit to be communicated within 30 calendar days.
Thus, Justice concludes that the woman stopped meeting the requirement of economic vulnerability by exceeding the maximum assets allowed after receiving the inheritance. For all these reasons, it dismisses the appeal, confirms the withdrawal of the Minimum Living Income and supports that it must return the 5,169.23 euros unduly collected.