Facts
[L.], born in 1909, deceased on June 7, 1996, had been receiving supplementary benefits (SB) since January 1, 1990. His house was initially estimated at the federal tax value of CHF 118,800.-, and then at the cantonal tax value of CHF 99,000.- as of January 1, 1992, which resulted in SB of CHF 218.- per month from that date. Upon learning that [L.] had donated his property (estimated at CHF 145,000.- according to the official market value) to his son G. on November 1, 1991, reserving a lifelong and free usufruct for himself and his wife M., the compensation fund recalculated the SB to CHF 5.- per month from February 1992. During the 1993 revision, the fund again set the value of the property at CHF 145,000.-, which resulted in SB of CHF 39.- per month from January 1, 1993. [L.] appealed against this decision, requesting higher SB and disputing that the property donated to his son should still be included in his assets.Considerations
1. According to case law, when evaluating assets for the calculation of SB, the cantonal tax value of the property must in principle be used, in accordance with Art. 17 para. 1 OASI/DI-SBA, and not the market value. This also applies when the beneficiary has transferred his property, as the ordinance does not make a distinction based on whether the assets are still in the possession of the beneficiary or not. 2. The consideration provided by the son, namely the establishment of a lifelong and free usufruct, represents 90% of the value of the property. This proportion…