## Facts

- Joyce Ashcraft was convicted of federal offenses and ordered to pay restitution as part of her sentence.
- Before incarceration, Ashcraft worked for Amana Refrigeration, which provided employees long-term disability insurance through Principal Life Insurance Company.
- Ashcraft became unable to work due to a medical condition and received periodic long-term disability payments under the employer-provided policy.
- In 2012, the United States sought to garnish Ashcraft’s disability payments to collect unpaid restitution.
- Ashcraft objected, arguing the disability payments were “earnings” under the Consumer Credit Protection Act (CCPA), which limits the amount of “earnings” subject to garnishment.
- The district court overruled the objection and allowed garnishment on the view that the disability payments were not “earnings.”

## Issues

1. Whether employer-provided long-term disability payments constitute “earnings” under the CCPA, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1672(a), 1673(a), such that the Act’s garnishment limits apply.

## Decision

- The Eighth Circuit reversed the district court’s order permitting garnishment without applying the CCPA limits.
- The court held that Ashcraft’s long-term disability payments are “earnings” within the meaning of the CCPA.
- The court concluded that the CCPA’s statutory limitations on garnishment therefore apply to those disability payments.
- The court reviewed the statutory interpretation question de novo.

## Legal Principles

- Under 15 U.S.C. § 1672(a), “earnings” means “compensation paid or payable for personal services, whether denominated as wages, salary, commission, bonus, or otherwise.”
- The phrase “or otherwise” indicates an inclusive definition that can cover non-enumerated, periodic payments tied to the employment relationship.
- Employer-provided disability benefits that function as wage replacement may qualify as “compensation ... for personal services,” even though paid during periods when the employee is not working.
- A construction of “earnings” that excludes wage-replacement disability payments is inconsistent with the statute’s text and the CCPA’s protective purpose of limiting garnishment of wage-like income.

## Conclusion

The Eighth Circuit held that periodic long-term disability benefits paid under an employer-provided policy are “earnings” under the CCPA, requiring application of the Act’s garnishment limits when the government seeks to collect criminal restitution from those payments.


United States v. Ashcraft, 732 F.3d 860 (8th Cir. 2013)