dojN002096.xml

dojN002096.xml

born-digital

email

yes

no

2002-01-19

Saturday, January 19, 2002 10:55 PM
Comments to Sep 11 Victim Comp Fund





January 19, 2002

Dear Mr. Feinberg,

Following are my comments regarding the September 11th Victims Compensation Fund of 2001:


1.) Compensation fund deductions should not include life insurance, pensions, Social Security or other death benefit payments. Life insurance, Social Security and workmans compensation were already paid for by the victims and are not part of the general fund. If changes are made to the regulations to remove these deductions, government programs that provide benefits (e.g. Social Security) should be guaranteed to continue. Individuals should not have to fight with their comp carriers or Social Security as to whether they should continue to receive benefits after awards are made.

2.) Compensation levels should be based on 2001 salaries, and not an average of 1998, 1999 and 2000. The 2001 salary level is the basis for future earnings potential. Any averaging over the years prior to 2001 only brings the salary level down and is not an indicator of true earnings potential of the victims.

3.) In cases where there is only one spouse and the victim left no will, the award should be paid to the spouse rather than to the estate of the victim, to be subjected to intestate laws. Although tax free, funds paid to the estate of the victim can be subject to heavy taxation levels if the laws governing the estate require dividing funds between spouse and children, posing an unnecessary tax burden on the victims family.

4.) Formulas used to calculate awards based on salary levels are far too conservative. Total amounts of awards are not adequate to cover what would have been earned during the career of the victim. Even when taking into consideration the presumption of shorter careers in the financial industry, formulas do not take into account later career changes that would have resulted in continued income for a longer period than is covered by the tables .

5.) There should be no maximum compensation level set to $231,000. All awards should be based on higher salaries as appropriate, with no cap on salary.

6.) Non-economic damages should be much higher and should not be subjected to any deductions.


Respectfully submitted,

Individual Comment
Princeton, NJ

2002-01-19