• Home
  • About Us
  • Getting Finances Done
    • Hiring Advisors
    • Debt Management
    • Spending Plan
  • Insurance
    • Life Insurance
    • Health Insurance
    • Disability Insurance
    • Homeowners/Renters Insurance
  • Contact Us
  • Our Editorial Commitment

The Free Financial Advisor

You are here: Home / Archives for Federal Regulations

Social Security Corrects Error in New Cardiovascular Disability Rules — What Claimants Should Know

September 17, 2026 by Amanda Blankenship Leave a Comment

Social Security cardiovascular disability rules
Social Security has corrected a numbering error in its recently revised rules for evaluating cardiovascular disorders in SSDI and SSI claims. The September correction doesn’t change the medical criteria or create new eligibility requirements for people with heart-related conditions. Pressmaster/Shutterstock

The Social Security Administration has issued a technical correction to its recently revised rules for evaluating cardiovascular disorders in disability claims, but people applying for benefits shouldn’t interpret the update as another change in eligibility requirements.

SSA published the correction in the Federal Register on September 16. It fixes a numbering error in the cardiovascular disability regulations the agency finalized earlier this summer.

The underlying Social Security cardiovascular disability rule was published July 2 and revised the medical criteria SSA uses when evaluating cardiovascular disorders in adults and children under the Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income programs.

The September Correction Changes One Number

The latest Federal Register action is extremely limited.

In Appendix 1 to Subpart P of Part 404, a heading appearing on page 40837 of the July 2 final rule was printed as “How do we evaluate ECG evidence?”

The September correction adds the missing number so the heading correctly reads: “2. How do we evaluate ECG evidence?”

No medical language in the section was changed.

The correction doesn’t revise what electrocardiogram evidence SSA considers, establish a new cardiovascular listing, change a medical threshold or alter who can qualify for disability benefits.

The July Rule Was Much More Significant

While the September correction is editorial, the July 2 final rule it addresses made substantive changes.

SSA revised the cardiovascular portion of its Listing of Impairments, commonly called the listings. The agency said the revisions reflect its disability-adjudication experience, advances in medical knowledge and public comments received following an earlier proposed rule.

The listings contain medical criteria SSA uses during the disability evaluation process. If an adult has a medically determinable impairment that meets or medically equals the criteria of an applicable listing and satisfies the other requirements, SSA can find the person disabled at that stage of the evaluation.

Cardiovascular conditions addressed in SSA’s listings include disorders involving the heart and circulatory system.

A Listing Isn’t the Only Way Someone Can Qualify

The September correction also shouldn’t be interpreted to mean that a person must precisely meet one cardiovascular listing to have any chance of receiving disability benefits.

SSA explains that the Listing of Impairments contains medical criteria used at a particular stage of its disability evaluation process.

If an adult’s severe impairment doesn’t meet or medically equal a listing, the disability evaluation can continue. SSA may consider the person’s residual functional capacity along with other factors relevant under the agency’s sequential evaluation process.

That distinction can be important for someone with significant heart disease whose medical condition doesn’t match every requirement of a particular cardiovascular listing.

ECG Evidence Remains Part of Cardiovascular Evaluation

An electrocardiogram, commonly abbreviated ECG or EKG, records electrical activity in the heart and can provide medical evidence relevant to certain cardiovascular conditions.

SSA’s cardiovascular regulations contain detailed guidance explaining how the agency evaluates medical evidence associated with cardiovascular impairments. The current cardiovascular listings include criteria and explanatory material for evaluating conditions involving the cardiovascular system.

The September correction doesn’t change that guidance. It simply restores the intended sequential number to one heading addressing ECG evidence.

For claimants and beneficiaries, that means there is no new application to submit, medical test to obtain or action to take solely because SSA issued this correction.

Claimants Should Focus on the Underlying Disability Rules

Someone with a pending SSDI or SSI claim involving a cardiovascular condition should continue responding to SSA requests for medical evidence and other information rather than worrying that the September correction changed the standard governing the claim.

SSA’s July rule is the substantive regulatory action to understand; the September notice merely corrects how one portion of that rule was numbered when published.

People with questions about how a cardiovascular condition is being evaluated in an individual disability case can review SSA’s current Disability Evaluation Under Social Security guidance or contact the agency directly.

Federal agencies routinely issue corrections when errors are discovered in published regulatory documents. In this case, the important takeaway is straightforward: SSA corrected a missing section number, not the substance of its cardiovascular disability criteria.

What to Read Next

Reasons Your Social Security Increase and Your Actual Check Increase Aren’t Always the Same

6 Social Security Earnings-Test Details Workers Near Retirement Often Misread

What to Know About Social Security Claiming Assumptions That Can Distort a Retirement Plan

Amanda Blankenship

Amanda Blankenship is the Chief Editor for District Media.  With a BA in journalism from Wingate University, she frequently writes for a handful of websites and loves to share her own personal finance story with others. When she isn’t typing away at her desk, she enjoys spending time with her daughter, son, husband, and dog. During her free time, you’re likely to find her with her nose in a book, hiking, or playing RPG video games.

Filed Under: news Tagged With: cardiovascular disorders, disability benefits, Federal Regulations, heart disease, Social Security, Social Security Disability, SSA, SSDI, SSI

IRS Sets December Hearing on Proposed Tax-Exempt Rules for Racial Nondiscrimination at Private Schools

September 17, 2026 by Amanda Blankenship Leave a Comment

IRS private school tax exemption
Treasury and the IRS are proposing updated racial nondiscrimination requirements for tax-exempt private schools, with a public hearing scheduled for December 2. The agencies estimate the proposal could affect as many as 18,000 private educational institutions. Ground Picture/Shutterstock

The Internal Revenue Service has scheduled a December public hearing on proposed regulations that would update federal tax-exemption rules governing racial nondiscrimination at private schools.

The hearing is scheduled for December 2, 2026, at 10 a.m. Eastern Time and will take place entirely by teleconference. It follows proposed regulations issued earlier this month by the Treasury Department and IRS under REG-119986-25.

The proposal would provide that a private school does not qualify for federal tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) if it adopts, maintains, or enforces a policy or practice that discriminates on the basis of race, color, or national or ethnic origin.

Private Schools Already Face Nondiscrimination Requirements

The proposal isn’t creating the concept of racial nondiscrimination as a condition of tax exemption from scratch.

Current IRS guidance for tax-exempt organizations says a private school seeking federal tax-exempt status must have a racially nondiscriminatory policy toward students and cannot discriminate against applicants or students based on race, color, or national or ethnic origin.

Existing requirements also address admissions, scholarships, loans, school programs and athletics. Tax-exempt private schools generally must publicize their nondiscrimination policies and maintain certain records demonstrating compliance.

The Treasury Department and IRS say the proposed regulations would update those rules in light of Supreme Court decisions and establish a uniform nondiscrimination standard.

The Proposal Would Also Address Race-Based Preferences

One significant part of the proposal involves provisions of existing IRS guidance that have allowed certain policies favoring racial minority groups when their purpose and effect were to establish or maintain a school’s nondiscriminatory policy.

Treasury and the IRS propose eliminating those provisions, saying the exceptions are inconsistent with the uniform nondiscrimination standard contemplated by the new regulations.

Under the proposal, covered schools couldn’t make admissions decisions or provide benefits based on race, color, or national or ethnic origin. Schools could continue programs intended to expand educational opportunity using race-neutral criteria such as family income, geographic location, first-generation status, individual hardship, military-family status, or academic achievement.

The proposal also wouldn’t prevent private schools from maintaining religious missions or programs. Treasury and the IRS say religious schools could continue selecting students based on genuine religious affiliation or membership when consistent with federal law.

The agencies estimate that the regulations could affect as many as 18,000 private educational institutions, including private primary and secondary schools, colleges, universities, professional schools and trade schools.

December 2 Hearing Will Be Conducted by Telephone

According to the federal hearing notice, anyone wishing to testify must submit an outline of the topics they plan to discuss by November 3, 2026.

Each speaker will receive 10 minutes.

If the IRS receives no outlines by November 3, the hearing will be cancelled, and the agency will publish a cancellation notice.

People who want to attend without testifying must register by email by November 30 to receive the telephone number and access code. Requests for disability-related assistance must be submitted by November 27.

Testimony outlines can be submitted through the federal rulemaking portal by identifying IRS and REG-119986-25 or mailed to the IRS address provided in the official notice.

The Rules Wouldn’t Take Effect Immediately

The proposal remains just that—a proposal. The hearing and public-comment process occur before Treasury, and the IRS determines what will appear in final regulations.

The September 4 proposed regulations state that the new rules, if finalized as contemplated, would affect private schools for taxable years beginning on or after May 31, 2027.

That distinction is important for schools, families, and donors because the September proposal hasn’t itself changed the current requirements for tax-exempt private schools.

For donors, a school’s federal tax-exempt status can also matter when determining whether a charitable contribution qualifies for a federal income-tax deduction, subject to the applicable tax rules.

The December hearing gives schools, nonprofit organizations and other interested parties another opportunity to weigh in before the regulations are finalized. Written comments on the underlying proposal and requests for a public hearing are also due November 3.

What to Read Next

Treasury Opens $5 Billion New Markets Tax Credit Round to Drive Investment in Low-Income Communities

IRS Proposes New Tax Rules for U.S. Companies With Foreign Income and Overseas Operations

September 15 Is a Major Tax Deadline – Who Actually Needs to Pay the IRS?

Amanda Blankenship

Amanda Blankenship is the Chief Editor for District Media.  With a BA in journalism from Wingate University, she frequently writes for a handful of websites and loves to share her own personal finance story with others. When she isn’t typing away at her desk, she enjoys spending time with her daughter, son, husband, and dog. During her free time, you’re likely to find her with her nose in a book, hiking, or playing RPG video games.

Filed Under: news Tagged With: 501(c)(3), charitable organizations, Education, Federal Regulations, IRS, nonprofit schools, private schools, tax rules, tax-exempt organizations, Treasury Department

SEC Proposes Opening U.S. Futures Trading to European Union Debt

September 3, 2026 by Amanda Blankenship Leave a Comment

European Union debt futures
The SEC has proposed adding European Union debt obligations to a rule that could allow futures based on those securities to be marketed and traded in the United States under CFTC oversight. The underlying EU debt securities would remain subject to federal securities laws. motioncenter/Shutterstock

The Securities and Exchange Commission is proposing a regulatory change that could make it easier for U.S. market participants to trade futures contracts tied to debt issued by the European Union.

The SEC proposed an amendment to Exchange Act Rule 3a12-8 on August 28, with the proposal published in the Federal Register on September 2. If finalized, the change would designate European Union debt obligations as “exempted securities” for the limited purpose of marketing and trading futures contracts on those securities in the United States or to U.S. persons.

The proposal does not change the regulatory status of the underlying EU bonds themselves. Instead, it addresses how futures contracts based on those securities would be regulated.

SEC Wants EU Debt Futures Treated Like Those of Certain Member States

Under the current version of Rule 3a12-8, debt obligations issued by several foreign governments receive exempted-security status specifically for futures marketing and trading. That list already includes debt issued by several individual European Union member states. EU-level debt, however, isn’t currently included.

The SEC’s proposal would eliminate that difference by adding debt obligations issued by the European Union itself to Rule 3a12-8.

SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins described the current situation as a regulatory inconsistency, noting that debt from several EU member states is covered by the rule while debt issued by the EU itself is not. The Commission says the amendment would leave the rule’s other substantive requirements unchanged.

The CFTC Would Regulate the Futures Contracts

If the amendment is finalized and the applicable requirements are met, futures contracts on EU debt obligations traded in the United States or to U.S. persons would fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Those futures would therefore be regulated under the Commodity Exchange Act, consistent with the treatment already given to futures based on debt obligations from foreign governments currently included in Rule 3a12-8.

There is an important limitation to that change.

The SEC would not be giving up jurisdiction over the actual European Union debt securities underlying the contracts. Offerings of those securities would remain subject to federal securities laws. In other words, the proposal changes the regulatory treatment of futures based on EU debt, not EU debt securities generally.

Why the SEC Says the Change Could Matter

The Commission says adding EU debt to the rule could increase access to these futures products for U.S. market participants. Among the potential benefits identified by the SEC are improved opportunities for hedging, lower transaction costs, greater market depth, less operational friction and increased competition.

A futures contract can allow a market participant to gain or manage exposure to the future price of an asset without simply buying or selling the underlying security. In the government-debt market, futures can be used by sophisticated investors and financial institutions to manage risks associated with changes in bond prices and interest rates.

The proposal is therefore likely to be most relevant to institutional investors, derivatives dealers and other professional market participants rather than ordinary households looking for a new place to invest their savings. The SEC also notes that the amendment could bring the treatment of EU-level debt futures more closely in line with futures on debt issued by European governments already covered by the rule.

The Proposal Is Part of a Broader SEC-CFTC Harmonization Effort

The SEC has been working with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission on a broader effort to reduce unnecessary differences between the agencies’ regulatory frameworks. That initiative has included work involving derivatives definitions, portfolio margining, market-data reporting and other areas where the responsibilities of the two regulators intersect.

The EU debt proposal is a comparatively narrow change, but the SEC describes it as another example of regulatory harmonization. Atkins said the existing difference between treatment of certain EU member-state debt and EU-issued debt creates the type of inconsistency that can produce confusion in financial markets. If adopted, the amendment would remove that particular distinction while retaining the SEC’s authority over the underlying securities.

The Public Has Until November 2 to Comment

The proposal was published in the Federal Register on September 2, beginning a public comment period that runs through November 2, 2026.

The proposal is identified as File No. S7-2026-29 and Release No. 34-106225. Interested parties can submit comments through the SEC’s online comment system or by email, with File No. S7-2026-29 included in the subject line. Paper comments may also be mailed to the SEC’s Secretary at 100 F Street NE, Washington, D.C. 20549-1090.

The SEC warns commenters that submissions are posted publicly, so individuals should not include information they don’t want made publicly available. For now, the regulatory change remains a proposal. U.S. market participants interested in futures tied to European Union debt will need to watch the rulemaking process to see whether the SEC ultimately adopts the amendment and whether the final version differs from the proposal.

What to Read Next

10 States Where Homeowners Are Falling Furthest Behind on Their Mortgages

You Paid the Credit Card Minimum on Time. So Why Is Your Balance Barely Moving?

7 Refund Payments Consumers Could Receive From the FTC Right Now

Amanda Blankenship

Amanda Blankenship is the Chief Editor for District Media.  With a BA in journalism from Wingate University, she frequently writes for a handful of websites and loves to share her own personal finance story with others. When she isn’t typing away at her desk, she enjoys spending time with her daughter, son, husband, and dog. During her free time, you’re likely to find her with her nose in a book, hiking, or playing RPG video games.

Filed Under: news Tagged With: bonds, CFTC, derivatives, EU Debt, European Union, Federal Regulations, financial markets, futures trading, Institutional Investors, interest rates, investing, SEC, Securities

Follow Us

Search this site:

Recent Posts

  • Can My Savings Account Affect My Financial Aid? by Tamila McDonald
  • 12 Ways Gen X’s Views Clash with Millennials… by Tamila McDonald
  • What Advantages and Disadvantages Are There To… by Jacob Sensiba
  • Call 911: Go To the Emergency Room Immediately If… by Stephen Kanaval
  • 7 Weird Things You Can Sell Online by Tamila McDonald
  • 10 Scary Facts About DriveTime by Tamila McDonald
  • How to Avoid NJ Exit Tax by Jacob Sensiba

Copyright © 2026 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework