Skip to content
Social Security Online
Office of the Inspector General
OIG Seal image
Blank Spacer Image

Audit Report - A-06-97-62003


Office of Audit

Canada`s Experience in Charging a User Fee for Social Insurance Number Cards - A-06-97-62003 - 5/22/97

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

FINDINGS

Public Reaction to the User Fee Has Been Favorable

The Primary Purpose of the User Fee is to Generate Revenue

The Costs and Workload Impact of the User Fee Are Moderate

The Social Insurance Number Card Plays a Lesser Role in Canadian Society

Canada has Experienced Lower Replacement Card Rates

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

OTHER MATTERS

APPENDICES

A: Application Process for Social Insurance Number Card

C: Computation of Estimated Cost Savings

D: Major Contributors to this Report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PURPOSE

This inspection report provides information on the feasibility of the Social Security Administration (SSA) charging a fee for replacement Social Security number (SSN) cards based on our review of the Canadian Government`s experiences in charging a user fee for replacement Social Insurance Number (SIN) cards.

BACKGROUND

The SSN and SSN card play major roles in American society. This has generated the need for individuals to have an SSN and an SSN card. As a result, SSA processed 16.6 million requests for SSN cards in Fiscal Year (FY) 1996. Approximately 10.9 million (65.7 percent) of these requests were for replacement SSN cards.

Congressional concern over immigration and the desire that the SSN card convey the stability of the Social Security program prompted Congress to examine SSN related issues. Issues examined include uses of the SSN and SSN card; methods to improve the SSN card issuance process; improvements to the security of the SSN card; and ways to reduce the cost of SSN card production. Congress passed the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996" which requires SSA to prepare an evaluation report on various issues including the feasibility of charging a fee for SSN cards.

To assist SSA in responding to Congress, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has undertaken this review of Canada`s user fee for replacement SIN cards. The Canadian Government has charged a CAN$10 user fee for replacement SIN cards since July 1, 1985. We combined in-person and telephone interviews with written documentation reviews to assess Canada`s experiences in charging a user fee for replacement SIN cards. We met with various Canadian officials familiar with:

1. the history of the SIN card,
2. the development of the user fee policies, and
3. the appropriate laws and regulations that provide the authority to charge a user fee.

We also visited a local office so that we could "walk through" the application process for initial and replacement SIN cards.

FINDINGS

Public Reaction to the User Fee Has Been Favorable

The Government`s use of user fees is well established in Canada. Therefore, the implementation of a user fee for replacement SIN cards was not unusual.

The Primary Purpose of the User Fee is to Generate Revenue

Agencies frequently have turned to user fees to generate revenue. In a 12-month period ended March 31, 1996, Human Resources Development Canada collected more than CAN$2.1 million through the use of user fees for replacement SIN cards.

The Costs and Workload Impact of the User Fee Are Moderate

The workload impact of the user fee activity on local offices is minimal. This is because the work force is already in place and the fee collection is a relatively small and integrated portion of the SIN card application process.

The Social Insurance Number Card Plays a Lesser Role in Canadian Society

Since its introduction as a means to register individuals for Unemployment Insurance and Canada Pension Plan, official use of the SIN and SIN card has expanded moderately. It is the Government`s policy that the SIN not become a universal identifier.

Canada has Experienced Lower Replacement Card Rates

Over the last 5 years, Canada`s replacement card rate has been nearly 3 times less than the rate SSA has experienced. Canada`s more limited uses for the card and its use of plastic in producing the cards may have an impact.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Canada`s experiences in charging a user fee for replacement SIN cards suggest that SSA could meet with similarly positive results. Based on SSA`s cost estimates for producing an SSN card, we estimate SSA would charge $13.00 for replacement SSN cards. Through a combination of revenue generation and cost avoidance (assuming some individuals become more responsible with their cards), SSA could recover approximately $142 million annually or $710 million over 5 years. Therefore, we recommend that SSA charge a fee for replacement SSN cards.

SSA COMMENTS

Since SSA is preparing a report to Congress on the issue of charging a user fee for initial and replacement SSN cards, the Agency stated that it is not prepared to state a position on OIG`s recommendation at this time. SSA provided additional comments regarding:

1. differences between the basis for and uses of SSN and SIN cards; and
2. issues related to direct and indirect costs, individual responsibility, and exceptions to the user fee.

OIG RESPONSE

Although we acknowledge general differences related to the expectations for and uses of SSN and SIN cards, we did not make it the purpose of this inspection to catalogue these differences. We instead focused our efforts on identifying similarities between SSA and Human Resources Development Canada. We wanted to determine if Canada`s experiences in charging a user fee would translate well to SSA. We also focused on answering the questions of SSA officials. Based on our work, we believe Canada`s experiences translate well to SSA and that Canada has already addressed many questions raised by SSA officials. Therefore, we continue to support our recommendation that SSA implement a user fee for replacement SSN cards.

Back to top

INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE

This inspection report provides information on the feasibility of the SSA charging a fee for replacement SSN cards based on our review of the Canadian Government`s experiences in charging a user fee for replacement SIN cards.

BACKGROUND

The SSN and SSN card have long played major roles in American society. In 1935, the Social Security program was the only user of the SSN and SSN card. However, in 1943 other Federal agencies began using the SSN as an identifier for their programs. During the 1960s, the use of the SSN expanded to identification of taxpayers, Medicare recipients, and military personnel. In the 1970s, the SSN became a means of locating absent parents and documenting eligibility for programs such as Aid to Families with Dependent Children.

Today the SSN is part of our everyday lives. For example:

• individuals can use the SSN card as proof of employment eligibility in the United States when applying for a job;

• credit bureaus use the SSN as one of several identifiers on an individual`s credit record;

• State agencies list the SSN card as a form of documentation that can be used when applying for a driver`s license; and

• individuals applying for professional licenses must supply their SSN (to assist in child support enforcement).

Concerns Regarding SSN Related Workloads

The varied uses for the SSN and SSN card have generated the need for individuals to have an SSN and an SSN card. As a result, SSA processed 16.6 million requests for SSN cards in FY 1996. Approximately 10.9 million (65.7 percent) of these requests were for replacement SSN cards.

Congressional concern over immigration and the desire that the SSN card convey the stability of the Social Security program prompted Congress to examine SSN related issues. OIG and the General Accounting Office have produced reports on a variety of issues, including:

• uses of the SSN and SSN card;

• methods to improve the SSN card issuance process;

• improvements to the security of the SSN card; and

• ways to reduce the cost of SSN card production.

In addition, Congress passed the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996." The legislation requires: (1) SSA to develop a prototype SSN card which is counterfeit resistant, uses new security features, and provides reliable proof of citizenship or legal residence status; (2) the use of the SSN in child support enforcement and in determining eligibility for the Earned Income Tax Credit; and (3) SSA to produce an evaluation report on the cost and workload impact of producing the counterfeit-resistant card, methods to improve the SSN application process, and the feasibility of charging a fee for SSN cards.

Canada`s User Fee for Replacement Social Insurance Number Cards

To assist SSA in responding to Congress regarding the feasibility of a user fee, OIG has undertaken this review of Canada`s user fee for replacement SIN cards. The Canadian Government has charged a CAN$10 user fee for replacement SIN cards since July 1, 1985. The similarities between Canada`s programs and those of SSA suggest that SSA can borrow from Canada`s experiences in imposing a user fee.

To increase the value of this review, SSA officials asked that we answer some specific questions regarding Canada`s user fee, including, but not limited to, the following:

• How do individuals pay the user fee?

• What does Canada do to keep individuals from evading the user fee?

• Besides revenue generation, are there other intentions related to charging a user fee (e.g., the fee makes individuals more responsible and less likely to lose the card)?

• Is the SIN used elsewhere in society so as to increase the card`s usefulness to the individual?

• How is the policy regarding charging a user fee conveyed to the public?

METHODOLOGY

We combined in-person and telephone interviews with written documentation reviews to assess Canada`s experiences in charging a user fee for replacement SIN cards. We visited the headquarters for Human Resources Development Canada in Hull, Quebec where we met with various Canadian officials familiar with: (1) the history of the SIN card, (2) the development of the user fee policies, and (3) the appropriate laws and regulations that provide the authority to charge a user fee. We also visited a local office so that we could "walk through" the application process for initial and replacement SIN cards.

This inspection was conducted in accordance with the Quality Standards for Inspections issued by the President`s Council on Integrity and Efficiency.

Back to top

FINDINGS

PUBLIC REACTION TO THE USER FEE HAS BEEN FAVORABLE

The Government`s use of user fees is well established in Canada. According to the officials with whom we spoke, the general public accepts user fees as a way of life. User fees that Canadians typically pay include fees for processing passports, immigration documents, and driver`s licenses. Therefore, the implementation of a user fee for replacement SIN cards was not unusual.

The Human Resources Development Canada--the Agency responsible for producing the SIN cards--conducts periodic reviews to collect public perceptions related to its services. The reports show that most people generally are pleased with the services they receive. Although some individuals complained about having to pay a user fee, especially if the loss of a card was not their fault (e.g., theft), most either did not rate it as a concern or mentioned that they found the fee to be nominal.

The Government Publicizes Changes Related to the Replacement Card User Fee

The Canadian Government makes every effort to inform the public regarding changes to policies on user fees. Fee policy changes are published in the Canada Gazette--similar in purpose to the Federal Register. If the change is significant, the Government may purchase advertising space in newspapers to alert the public of the change.

THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE USER FEE IS TO GENERATE REVENUE

The Canadian Government has reduced in size drastically over the last few years. Officials mentioned that reductions in staffing and budgets have exceeded 20 percent in many cases. With no relief in sight, agencies frequently have turned to user fees to generate revenue.

The Human Resources Development Canada imposed the user fee to help recover the cost of producing SIN cards. In a 12-month period ended March 31, 1996, Human Resources Development Canada collected more than CAN$2.1 million through the use of user fees for replacement SIN cards. (Overall, Human Resources Development Canada produced 994,707 total SIN cards during this time period and has approximately 31 million total SIN cards in circulation.)

Exceptions Exist to Charging a User Fee for a Replacement Card

The law allows for specific, limited exceptions to charging a user fee. To be granted a waiver, documentation usually is required. The legally allowed exceptions are as follows:

  • a legal change in the name of the number holder;
  • an official error (e.g., a Government employee incorrectly entered the individual`s name resulting in an incorrect spelling appearing on the card); and
  • loss of the card due to a natural disaster.

We observed official correspondence from individuals or their representatives requesting that the user fee be waived due to a lack of resources needed to pay the fee. In every case that we observed, the Government denied the request.

By Law, User Fees Cannot be Excessive

In general, user fees are not to exceed the cost of providing a given service. The law specifically states that fees and charges for a service ". . . provided by or on behalf of Her Majesty in right of Canada . . . may not exceed the cost to Her Majesty in right of Canada of providing the service . . . ." If the fee exceeds the cost of providing the service, it is considered a tax and is governed under a different set of laws.

The Costs Used to Determine the User Fee Are Audited Annually

Each year, the Internal Audit Bureau or a contractor audits the costs associated with a user fee. The major categories used in the SIN card audit include:

  • Salaries
  • Transportation and Communications (e.g., postage for SIN cards)
  • Information (e.g., printing costs for SIN cards)
  • Professional and Special Services
  • Rentals (e.g., renting space outside building as required)
  • Repairs and Maintenance
  • Material and Supplies
  • Acquisition of Machinery and Equipment
  • Central Government Services (e.g., charges for accommodation of office space)
  • Contribution to Employee Benefits
  • Indirect Costs (e.g., salary and non-salary expenses for local and regional, finance, personnel, and administrative support services provided to operations by the department)

The total administrative costs associated with producing all SIN cards--both initial and replacement cards--is added and this total is divided by the total number of SIN cards produced during the year. The resulting dollar amount, rounded up to the nearest whole dollar, becomes the basis for the replacement card user fee.

THE COSTS AND WORKLOAD IMPACT OF THE USER FEE ARE MODERATE

The workload impact of the user fee activity on local offices is minimal. This is because the work force is already in place and the fee collection is a relatively small and integrated portion of the SIN card application process. For additional information regarding the SIN card production process, please refer to Appendix A.

Internal Controls Used to Track Receipt of User Fee Are Not Overly Burdensome

When a local office receives a replacement SIN card application, the clerk must record the receipt of the user fee. The fee is recorded into an electronic data base, called the Automated Receipt and Deposit System (ARADS), which generates a receipt number. The clerk writes this number in the appropriate location on the application form. If the clerk fails to include this information, the Social Insurance Registry--the Agency that physically produces the cards--will not process the application.

In order to prompt a deposit in compliance with procedures, ARADS will tell the clerk when total receipts, since the last deposit, exceed CAN$500. The SIN coordinator for the local office periodically receives reports showing the number of replacement cards that the office processed, as well as the total deposits. This procedure provides verification that the office has made all appropriate deposits.

If an individual mails an application for a replacement card, two clerks open the mail and record the receipt of any funds received. This prevents anyone from taking the fees and then claiming that the applicant failed to include the fee. According to the officials with whom we spoke, applicants rarely claim that they did not receive proper credit for a mailed user fee.

Costs Associated with Collecting the User Fee Are Included in the Fee

The method used to determine the user fee includes costs associated with receiving, recording, and depositing the user fee; therefore, the costs of receiving the fee are included in the fee itself. The Canadian Government does not bear additional costs as a result of charging a user fee.

THE SOCIAL INSURANCE NUMBER CARD PLAYS A LESSER ROLE IN CANADIAN SOCIETY

When the Social Insurance Registration Program began in 1964, it introduced the SIN as a vehicle to register individuals for two Federal Government programs: Unemployment Insurance and the Canada Pension Plan. Since this time, its official use has expanded moderately. The programs authorized to use the SIN are all Federal programs, including, but not limited to, Revenue Canada-Taxation, Old Age Security, Family Allowances, Child Tax Credit, and Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

It is the Government`s policy that the SIN not become a universal identifier. Although the Government cannot specifically prohibit an organization from using the number, it strongly discourages such activity. The Government itself goes to extremes to ensure that it does not use the SIN improperly. The officials with whom we spoke mentioned that they have employee identification numbers that are different from their SINs.

CANADA HAS EXPERIENCED LOWER REPLACEMENT CARD RATES

Over the last 5 years, Canada`s replacement card rate has been nearly 3 times less than the rate SSA has experienced. Canada`s replacement rate has remained around 20 percent over the last several years. In contrast, SSA`s replacement rate has exceeded 56 percent for FY 1992 through FY 1996. The following factors may help account for this difference.

  • Fewer Uses. As described above, the SIN card has fewer uses than the SSN card. Some of the officials with whom we spoke mentioned that they had lost their cards years ago, but not suffered as a result. As long as they could provide their SINs when needed, the cards were unnecessary.
  • Older Applicants. Canadian law requires individuals to have a SIN when they begin participating in insurable employment. As a result, many individuals do not apply for SINs until they begin working as teenagers.
  • Plastic Cards. Canada`s cards are made of plastic as opposed to paper. Although some individuals have criticized the material for being too brittle (believing this to be a reason why they should not have to pay a user fee), at a minimum the plastic is more durable than the paper SSN cards.

Back to top

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

Canada`s experiences in charging a user fee for replacement SIN cards suggest that SSA could meet with similarly positive results. Canada`s procedures suggest that a successful program can be both simple and straightforward, and incur little direct cost to SSA.

In FY 1996, SSA estimated the administrative cost of issuing an initial or replacement SSN card at $12.51. If SSA adopted Canada`s policy of rounding up to the nearest whole dollar, the proposed fee for replacement SSN cards would be $13.00. Through a combination of revenue generation and cost avoidance (assuming some individuals become more responsible with their cards), SSA could recover approximately $142 million annually or $710 million over 5 years. Therefore, we recommend that SSA charge a fee for replacement SSN cards.

SSA COMMENTS

Since SSA is preparing a report to Congress on the issue of charging a user fee for initial and replacement SSN cards, the Agency stated that it is not prepared to state a position on OIG`s recommendation at this time. SSA provided additional comments, including statements regarding the adequacy of our reporting on the differences between the basis for the SSN and the SIN and the uses of the cards. The comments also raised issues regarding: (1) direct and indirect costs associated with charging a user fee, (2) individuals becoming more responsible with their cards if faced with paying a user fee, and (3) exceptions to the user fee and the impact on revenue generation. For a complete copy of SSA`s comments, please see Appendix B.

OIG RESPONSE

Although we acknowledge general differences related to the expectations for and uses of SSN and SIN cards, we did not make it the purpose of this inspection to catalogue these differences. We instead focused our efforts on identifying similarities between SSA and Human Resources Development Canada. We wanted to determine if Canada`s experiences in charging a user fee would translate well to SSA. We also focused on answering the questions of SSA officials. Based on our work, we believe Canada`s experiences translate well to SSA and that Canada has already addressed many questions raised by SSA officials. Therefore, we continue to support our recommendation that SSA implement a user fee for replacement SSN cards.

The additional issues that SSA expressed address the fee itself (e.g., amount of fee, total revenue generation). Our responses are as follows:

  • We acknowledge in the report that the fee most likely would rise based on the direct costs of collecting the user fee. We believe it is appropriate that the individual requesting the replacement card should bear the cost of collecting the fee. It was outside the scope of this inspection to do a cost-benefit analysis to determine if indirect costs would exceed revenue generated.
  • Our report states that Canadian officials did not consider potential changes in behavior when deciding to implement a user fee. Therefore, we did not find any information that would support conclusions regarding the user fee`s behavioral impact. Our inclusion of a statement in the recommendation about individuals becoming more responsible for their SSN cards--which would lead to cost avoidance--was to show contrast with SSA`s current policy which offers little or no incentive to be responsible.
  • We believe it is proper for SSA to set the policy related to which individuals, if any, are exempted from the user fee. We do acknowledge that exemptions would impact revenue generation. It is important to note, however, that Canadian officials continue to debate the merits of having any individuals exempted from the user fee.

OTHER MATTERS

This report focused on experiences of the Canadian Government in implementing a user fee for issuing replacement SIN cards. It is important to note that misuse of SSN cards in the United States represents a serious fraud problem. Duplicate SSN cards may be sold to individuals who use them to establish fraudulent identity and obtain Government benefits and services. Charging fees for replacement cards offers SSA an opportunity to deter this type of fraud by creating a financial disincentive to those individuals who make multiple requests for cards. In addition, SSA could establish a documentation trail for identifying individuals who might be involved in such fraud schemes if the Agency required that payments for cards be made by personal check.

Back to top

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

APPLICATION PROCESS FOR SOCIAL INSURANCE NUMBER CARD

An individual can use one of two methods to apply for a SIN card. The first is to visit a local office (called a Canada Employment Center or CEC). There, the clerk will assist the applicant in ensuring that he or she: (1) completed the application in a complete and legible manner, (2) presented acceptable proof-of-identity documents, and (3) paid the user fee, if necessary. (Approximately 85 percent of all applicants use this method.) These applications are forwarded to the Social Insurance Registry (SIR) on a daily basis. The SIR is responsible for processing the applications and producing the cards. The second method is for the applicant to send the application, proof-of-identity documents, and fee, if necessary, directly to the SIR.

The SIR uses various steps to efficiently process the applications. The mailroom receives all applications, those from the CECs and those from applicants. Here, minor processing takes place and the applications are batched for processing. The operators take the batched applications and process them at computerized workstations. They search the SIR data base to verify the statements on the applications. If the individual provides a SIN, this is entered into the system. If the individual does not provide a SIN--the individual is claiming that this is an application for an initial SIN--a name search is used. If the search results are acceptable and all requirements are met, the case is processed and a SIN card issued. If the search results are not acceptable or not all the requirements are met, the operator rejects the application and returns it either to the CEC or directly to the applicant. Any fees received are held until the application is returned to SIR for resumption of processing.

Four times daily, the card production operators request the system to produce a card production file based on all processed applications. The operators run the file through the card production system that produces both the SIN card and the mailing pieces.

Assuming no backlog, this automated process allows SIR to produce cards the same day applications are received in the mailroom. Overall, the in-house processing time has been reduced from 3 weeks to an average of less than1 day to 5 days (depending on backlogs).

APPENDIX C

COMPUTATION OF ESTIMATED COST SAVINGS

This report uses Canada`s model for determining SSA`s cost recovery for charging a replacement card user fee. In the Accountability Report for Fiscal Year 1996, SSA determined the unit cost for producing an SSN card to be $12.51. This would produce a user fee of $13.00 ($12.51 rounded to the nearest whole dollar). In its response to our report, SSA said that it produced 10.9 million replacement cards in FY 1996. Therefore, a $13.00 user fee x 10.9 million replacement cards results in $141.7 million in cost savings.

APPENDIX D

MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT

Office of the Inspector General

William Fernandez, Director, Program Audits (West)
Brian Pattison, Deputy Director
Sterlin McGruder, Senior Auditor
James McLendon, Auditor

  Link to FirstGov.gov: U.S. Government portal Privacy Policy | Website Policies & Other Important Information | Site Map
Need Larger Text?
  Last reviewed or modified Monday Jan 14, 2008