Is my mother eligible for SNAP?
If she lives by herself, my guess would be that she qualifies as a household of one. Either way, her monthly income is below the threshold, so she should be eligible. Per the linked website The only way to determine if your household is eligible for SNAP benefits is to apply. I'd say it's worth a try.
Businesses from food to retail, all assume the risk of spoilage, theft, or any form of lost assets. It's just business. With that said, I'm sure your mom didn't imagine too many ways she could've lost out when opening her nailshop. I'm unsure what the policy is that you're looking for, but my best advice to you would be to cut your losses and learn from this.  Hopefully you and your mother can be sure to check or figure out a system to ensure customers don't lie about their payments. Good luck "The bottom line is you broke the law.  While this is pretty much victimless, it is none the less a violation of the law and should be avoided in the future.  I would have not agreed to this as a parent and it sets a bad precedent.  As such I would avoid trading and move the money into cash until you turn 18.   Once you turn 18 you should transfer the money into an account of your own.  From there you may proceed as you wish. As far as paying taxes, of course you need to pay them.  Your mother did this as a favor to you and by doing such you caused her tax bill to rise.  As a gesture of goodwill you should at least provide her with half of the profits, not the 15% you propose.  Fifteen percent would be the ""I am an ungrateful son"" minimum, and I would seriously consider giving all of the profits to her." If a parent has access to the birth certificate, social security card, passport, and other legal documentation indicating family relationship along with the minimum balance, I expect either online or in-person creating a Joint Tenancy With Right of Survivorship account wouldn't be too difficult and allows for either party to add or remove funds. Conceivably the bank account could have been created as a Custodial account but risks when the son reaches the Age of Majority on the account she would lose control. If you have access to the above mentioned documents and depending on parental rights assigned after the divorce you can follow what is suggested in this link: https://blog.smartcredit.com/2011/07/28/what-age-can-i-have-a-credit-report/ to get the credit reports. The credit reports should list what lender accounts are tied to your son.  They won't list any 'credit' assets like savings or investment accounts: http://www.myfico.com/crediteducation/in-your-credit-report.aspx As suggested a credit freeze would be appropriate. If he has reached 18 already, he can do it himself. Unless she under a Termination of Parental Rights order what I mentioned above should still hold. "This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://www.heritage.org/welfare/report/five-myths-about-welfare-and-child-poverty) reduced by 98%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; Even in a non-expansion state, the single mother will still have substantially more combined income from welfare and earnings by holding a minimum-wage job than by relying only on welfare.  &gt; The notion of a welfare poverty trap is typically based on analyses using combinations of welfare benefits that rarely occur in the real world.  &gt; The data in the article show that when a single mother has earnings at the poverty level, she will typically have combined earnings and welfare at roughly twice the poverty level.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6uzqzz/five_myths_about_welfare_and_child_poverty/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~195270 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **welfare**^#1 **benefit**^#2 **work**^#3 **program**^#4 **percent**^#5" "I think you're asking yourself the wrong question. The real question you should be asking yourself is this:  ""Do I want to a) give my parents a $45,000 gift, b) make them $45,000   loan, or c) neither?"" The way you are talking in your question is as if you have the responsibility and authority to manage their lives. Whether they choose bankruptcy, and the associated stigma and/or negative self-image of financial or moral failure, or choose to muddle through and delay retirement to pay off their debt, is their question and their decision.   Look, you said that loaning it to them was out, because you'd rather see them retire than continue to work. But what if they want to continue to work? For all the stress they're dealing with now, entrepreneurial people like that are not happy  You're mucking about in their lives like you can run it. Stop it. You don't have the right; they're adults. There may come a time when they are too senile to be responsible for themselves, and then you can, and should, step up and take responsibility for them in their old age, just as they did for you when you were a child. But that time is not now. And by the way, from the information you've given, the answer should be C) neither. If giving or loaning them this kind of money taps you out, then you can't afford it." You don't get any tax benefit.   When you are helping a relative or a friend in such situations the income is just gone.   The only way to get around this is if you contribute to a charity, and they give it to your mom.  You can then deduct the contributions to that charity.  However, the IRS has cracked down on such situations and it probably is not worth pursuing.  By the recent tax rules, that charity can use those contributions in which every way they choose, they cannot guarantee they go to your mom. Given that you are closed to your allowed exclusion (14K for 2017), I would work to keep your number under that.  If you are married, you each get that exclusion so you can give up to 28K.   I can't really speak to the reduction of benefits part as I am knowledgeable and more details on the type of transfer payments she receives would be germane to the discussion. Obviously the best way to consolidate the real-estate loans is with a real-estate loan. Mortgages, being secured loans, provide much better interest rates. Also, interest can be deducted to some extent (depending on how the proceeds are used, but up to $100K of the mortgage can have deductible interest just for using the primary residence as a collateral). Last but not least, in many states mortgages on primary residence are non-recourse (again, may depend on the money use). That may prove useful if in the future your mother runs into troubles repaying it. So yes, your instincts are correct. How to convince your mother - that's between you and her. "Fitting a description? Stop it. That's a gut feeling you have no evidence of.  Let's talk numbers.   She took home $76 a day from Popeyes without taxes. She currently only has one job, so let's operate on that.  She takes home $313 after taxes a week coming to $1278 per month.  She has two sons. Let's say she has a two bedroom apartment. The medium price for that in Missouri is $883. The article mentioned her son's were two bus rides away. She can't drive because she can't afford insurance. A monthly bus pass for one person in Kansas City is $50. After Taxes, Rent, and transportation she has $345. According to USDA, her two sons would need $348 for a month ""thrifty"" (lowest income) level food budget because they're 14 and 15. She's already broke after Food, Rent, and Transportation.   We haven't discussed utility or phone bills. Her children's transportation,Internet service, Clothing,Heat, or School supplies.   Are their larger issues at play that allow this to happen? Absolutely. However,  the minimum wage used to keep a family of three out of poverty. She's the head of a family of three and she's homeless. Her spending habits could've been better when she had two jobs. However, we don't know those, Her debt,  the percentage of her money that goes to health care or any ailments her children might have, but we do know she suffers from high blood pressure. Which the average black patient spends $887 a year on hypertension medication.   You're also completely disregarding that poor people can't do things in Bulk. It's more sensible to buy something that cost 0.15 per unit as opposed to 0.25 per unit. However, if you can't afford the bulk item, you're stuck buying the one with less value.   Her house was condemned. She had to move. Signing a lease usually requires The First Month, Last month, and security deposit. If we're operating on the median rent, we're asking her to come up with close to 2700 dollars in a day.   Do I think we should have a nation $15.00 Minimum wage? no. Do I think minimum wage should be based on average cost of living and median housing in states/large cities? Yes.  Sources:   https://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/usda_food_plans_cost_of_food/CostofFoodJul2014.pdf  https://www.cbsnews.com/news/most-americans-cant-handle-a-500-surprise-bill/  http://piperreport.com/blog/2013/05/13/health-care-spending-hypertension-cost-high-blood-pressure/  http://store.kcata.org/31daypass.php  /u/philosoraptor1000 it's not just personal responsibility. The cost of living has skyrocketed. The minimum wage hasn't. Your sarcasm is trash too.   /u/thewaywardsaint This sub has become a joke because users like you spew trash, condescending, opinions instead of voicing your opinion using facts, concepts and numbers." You're crazy to cash out your Roth or take on 401k loan, as that is addressing a short-term problem without doing anything about the longer-term issue. Just don't do it. Through no fault of her own, your mom is insolvent. It happens to people all of the time, and the solution is chapter 7 bankruptcy.  The only thing that I would do with my money in this situation is help her with bankruptcy attorney fees if needed, and maybe bid on it at auction, if the house in in good shape. "If you're under 18 there's not much you can do. As a minor, your kinda just stuck. There are routes to go, but not many.  If you're over 18, here's what you can do.  Now these steps won't help you not anger your mother. They're ""what you can do"" but it doesn't mean you ""should"". Keep in mind that it might be better just to have a conversation. In that conversation, if you think you need to say, ""I will file a complaint with the FBI, and have you arrested if you don't stop! You're breaking the law and invading my privacy."" Again these are drastic steps to take. More moderate steps may be advisable." I'm amazed at how much debt my mom was able to accumulate before they finally cut her off. And it was all unsecured debt so there was jack shit they can do about her defaulting.  If you're poor, and old (no assets, no house, no nothing), it makes sense to go as far into unsecured debt as possible. I think the statute of limitations is 2 years so I suspect that she may not qualify, also BOA was not the last bank to hold her mortgage.  I doubt she'll receive anything. She's just glad the whole mess is behind her. "You can pontificate about how life is so hard for her because shit costs money and you're right, she can't support herself and kids. However, that doesn't change the basic economic reality that working full time at Popeyes simply DOES NOT provide enough value to her employer and there are two many people with her very low skill set that she cannot command a higher wage. No amount of government programs will change that. Robbing the tax payers through welfare, killing businesses and destroying jobs by imposing a wage that simply is infeasible is counter productive, unsustainable, and simply misguided. Don't believe me? Ask the University of Washington who have the numbers on Seattle's ever escalating minimum wage and the effect on [jobs.] (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-26/shocking-study-finds-seattle-min-wage-hikes-has-cost-works-14mm-hours-year-6700-jobs) This is, of course, assuming you care that people are being put out of work so a few can be paid a ""living wage"". Welfare is an endless tap of free money, [right?] (http://www.usdebtclock.org)    The irony of your oh so well cited comment is that you didn't apply it to your own proposed solution of a minimum wage increase. [Here's](http://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/report/higher-fast-food-wages-higher-fast-food-prices) a great analysis of effect of this change on consumer prices, how it affects the capital side of the equation of whether to operate a restaurant at all, and how a higher minimum wage impairs the creation of entry level jobs.    Succinctly, minimum wage jobs were never meant to be able to support a family of three, no matter how much you wish it could. By creating artificially higher wages you'll get higher unemployment, more substitution of labor with more capital intensive solutions (ordering kiosks, etc), and higher taxes and consumer prices.   Edit: Link B.S.  Edit 2: **trigger warning** Also, it's a lot easier to raise kids with two working parents, that's just math for you. Talk about a bad personal choice that no one has touched on. Poor kids :(" Your relative in the US could buy a pre-paid Visa (aka Visa gift card) and give you the numbers on that to pay.  They're available for purchase at many grocery/convenience stores.  In most (all??) cases there'll be a fee of a several dollars charged in addition to the face value of the card. The biggest headache I can think of would be that pre-paid cards are generally only available in $25/50/100 increments; unless the current SAT price matches one of the standard increments they'll have to buy the next card size up and then get the remaining money off it in a separate transaction.  A grocery store would be one of the easier places for your relative to do this because cashiers there are used to splitting transactions across multiple payment sources (something not true at most other types of business) due to regularly processing transactions partially paid for via welfare benefits. "The author really glosses over the impact of changes pertaining to ""return to work"" requirements/qualification.   [In Georgia, some recipient groups have been reduced by 60%](http://www.myajc.com/news/breaking-news/more-will-have-work-keep-food-stamps/pu0Y9SASOVxc5QwEzJJLdJ/). I'd be cautious about celebrating this kind of report being connected to people rising out of poverty status. The more obvious conclusion is that the reductions owe more to people simply being excluded from SNAP."