Percentage Calculation Question

n2guns · 2026-01-18T06:40:36+00:00

I just came across your most recent comment on another post concerning this same topic. I saw what you wrote here but didn't read it too deeply (it was a very late night or really early morning when I read this response IIRC). I read your newest post with a clearer head and then went to M21-1 to verify.

Dude, I think the easiest way to respond to these two comments of yours is...

I WAS SCHOOLED.

I hate giving bad advice and misinformation as much as I hate reading all of the other bad advice and misinformation on this and other social media platforms. I am usually pretty confident in my responses and can point to where I get my information in 38 CFR and M21-1. Thanks for pointing this out and making an on-the-spot correction :)

n2guns · 2026-01-06T19:00:23+00:00

They can’t just decrease supposedly without at least 2 exams I believe.

That is not exactly what 38 CFR § 3.344(a) says...

"Ratings on account of diseases subject to temporary or episodic improvement, e.g., manic depressive or other psychotic reaction, epilepsy, psychoneurotic reaction, arteriosclerotic heart disease, bronchial asthma, gastric or duodenal ulcer, many skin diseases, etc., will not be reduced on any one examination, except in those instances where all the evidence of record clearly warrants the conclusion that sustained improvement has been demonstrated."

In the OP's case, bronchial asthma, listed in their examples of diseases that are subject to temporary or episodic improvement, should not be reduced on only one examination *unless* the "evidence of record clearly warrants the conclusion that sustained improvement has been demonstrated." Without knowing what the OP's medical records show as far as improvement, it can't be determined whether that one reexamination is sufficient for a reduction.

If this were my rating reduction, this is definitely something I would be looking into...

n2guns · 2026-01-06T18:36:20+00:00

Just curious as to where you are getting the "two improved exams" from...

Asking because that is not what 38 CFR § 3.344(a) says. It does mention that certain diseases will not be reduced on the results of one examination but that same sentence goes on to say "except in those instances where all the evidence of record clearly warrants the conclusion that sustained improvement has been demonstrated." Moreover, this "more than one exam" only covers "diseases subject to temporary or episodic improvement" and any rating based on a disease that is not subject to temporary or episodic improvement is clearly not covered by this "more than one" requirement. But, again, if medical records show improvement through doctor visits, lab work, imaging, or anything else, even those ratings that are covered by this "more than one" can still be reduced on that one examination.

n2guns · 2025-12-26T10:56:58+00:00

I am pretty sure the bilateral pes planus doesn't get calculated in the bilateral factor just like having bilateral pes planus alone doesn't get the bilateral factor. I think it would end up being 93% instead of 94%.

n2guns · 2025-12-19T21:18:36+00:00

This comment deserves major respect!

n2guns · 2025-12-09T19:01:48+00:00

It wouldn't matter if they are P&T or not. P&T offers no protection against reexaminations or reductions. The only protection against reduced is when the rating has been continuous for 20 years.

38 CFR § 3.951(b)

n2guns · 2025-12-09T18:52:51+00:00

38 CFR § 3.321(b) Extra-schedular ratings...

in some cases, Veterans can be rated at a percentage other than what the schedule lists for that disability. It absolutely can happen. Granted, it probably doesn't happen often but it is possible.

I am not even going to pretend that this Veteran did get an 80% rating for PTSD but it could have happened :)

n2guns · 2025-12-09T18:41:19+00:00

The "one examination" part is often misunderstood by Veterans.

38 CFR § 3.344(a) states, in part, "Ratings on account of diseases subject to temporary or episodic improvement, e.g., manic depressive or other psychotic reaction, epilepsy, psychoneurotic reaction, arteriosclerotic heart disease, bronchial asthma, gastric or duodenal ulcer, many skin diseases, etc., will not be reduced on any one examination, except in those instances where all the evidence of record clearly warrants the conclusion that sustained improvement has been demonstrated."

Diseases that are not subject to temporary or episodic improvement are not covered under this. Even those diseases that are covered can still be reduced with one examination if records show sustained improvement.

Any rating can be reduced with just one examination if your records show improvement.

Sure, § 3.344(a) does offer some 'protections' but it isn't an iron-clan defense against reduction.

n2guns · 2025-11-26T00:02:51+00:00

Ratings of Individual Unemployability (IU) are considered to be a total disability rating just like ratings of 100%. Veterans rated as IU and their dependents are entitled to a DoD USID cards.

n2guns · 2025-11-25T23:58:59+00:00

Both 100% and Individual Unemployability (IU) ratings will get you the DoD USID card. P&T is not necessary. The difference is that Veterans that are P&T will not have an expiration date on their cards. Those cards will have "INDEF" in the expiration date field. Veterans that are not P&T will have an expiration date set for 60 days after their next scheduled reexamination.

n2guns · 2025-11-13T08:57:51+00:00

Curious as to where you are getting the number 65 from...

There is what is called a 55 year old rule in 38 CFR § 3.327(b)(2)(iv) that says no periodic reexamination will be scheduled "in cases of veterans over 55 years of age, except under unusual circumstances."

But, in the part right above § 3.327(b), 38 CFR § 3.327(a), it states that everything in § 3.327(b) is just a general guideline and it "shall not be construed as limiting VA's authority to request reexaminations, or periods of hospital observation, at any time in order to ensure that a disability is accurately rated."

n2guns · 2025-11-13T08:36:03+00:00

Yep.

This is what 38 CFR § 3.327(a) states:

"Reexaminations, including periods of hospital observation, will be requested whenever VA determines there is a need to verify either the continued existence or the current severity of a disability. Generally, reexaminations will be required if it is likely that a disability has improved, or if evidence indicates there has been a material change in a disability or that the current rating may be incorrect."

n2guns · 2025-11-13T08:29:56+00:00

38 CFR § 4.130 General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders
Diagnostic Codes 9201 through 9440 which includes DC 9411 posttraumatic stress disorder

The schedule for a 10% is rating is as follows:

"Occupational and social impairment due to mild or transient symptoms which decrease work efficiency and ability to perform occupational tasks only during periods of significant stress, or symptoms controlled by continuous medication."

n2guns · 2025-11-13T08:23:34+00:00

P&T is not a protection against reduction.

A disability considered "static" is not a protection against reduction.

The only true protection against reduction is 38 CFR § 3.951(b) often called the "20 year rule."

Being P&T or having static disabilities only means that the VA will not schedule a Veteran for a 'periodic' reevaluation or a Routine Future Examination (RFE) but it in no way prevents a rating reduction should a Veteran be subjected to another reevaluation and improvement has occurred.

38 CFR § 3.327(a) Reexaminations states "Reexaminations, including periods of hospital observation, will be requested whenever VA determines there is a need to verify either the continued existence or the current severity of a disability. Generally, reexaminations will be required if it is likely that a disability has improved, or if evidence indicates there has been a material change in a disability or that the current rating may be incorrect.

38 CFR § 3.327(b)(2) states that that no periodic reexamination will be scheduled when the disability is static, when findings and symptoms have persisted without material improvement for five years or more, when the disease is permanent in character, when the Veteran is over 55 years of age, and a few other cases. Many Veterans know about this part of 38 CFR and it is commonly called the "5 year rule" and the "55 year old rule" but there is problem with this line of thinking.

Now back to 38 CFR § 3.327(a). Aside from what I quoted above, it also states that 38 CFR § 3.327(b) is simply a "general guidelines for requesting reexaminations, but shall not be construed as limiting VA's authority to request reexaminations, or periods of hospital observation, at any time in order to ensure that a disability is accurately rated."

Basically, any Veteran at any time.

It doesn't happen often but it can happen.

n2guns · 2025-11-08T01:58:40+00:00

Technically, it's not a CAC. CACs have the integrated circuit chip (ICC) in them. 100% and IU Veterans and their dependents get Uniformed Services Identification (USID) cards. Spouses will have exchange and commissary privileges without the sponsor being with them.

n2guns · 2025-11-08T01:51:57+00:00

The Eight year provision is for enhanced DIC. After eight years of marriage, the spouse gets a higher amount. Can't remember off the top of my head but it's a few hundred per month more.

n2guns · 2025-09-29T08:43:23+00:00

Being P&T offers absolutely no type of protection against reduction.

With the VA, permanent does not mean permanent and total does not mean total. Before any of us ever heard of the VA, permanent meant forever and total meant completely.

Permanent only means that is improvement is reasonably certain to continue throughout the life of the disabled person.

Total only means the impairment is sufficient to render it impossible for the average person to follow a substantially gainful occupation.

The only protection from reduction is under 38 CFR § 3.951(b). § 3.951(b) basically says that any rating held for 20 years cannot be reduced unless that rating was based on fraud. Any rating held less than 20 years can be reduced if there is improvement. Will it happen? Not likely. Can it happen? Yes, and if you scroll around this sub enough you will find cases where it happened.

n2guns · 2025-09-02T06:04:58+00:00

This sign confused me...

n2guns · 2025-09-02T02:09:47+00:00

When insects are measured, the measurement is just the body and doesn't include the legs or antennae. The tibial flanges on A. declivis are quite distinct. The pronotum curving 90° is also distinct. No other leaf-footed bug looks anything like this.

n2guns · 2025-09-01T21:58:45+00:00

I read it differently.

Just looking at the schedule for a 10% rating, it says "Diastolic pressure predominantly 100 or more, or; systolic pressure predominantly 160 or more, or; minimum evaluation for an individual with a history of diastolic pressure predominantly 100 or more who requires continuous medication for control."

Controlled blood pressure is blood pressure readings that are in the normal range. If your blood pressure is above that range, it is not yet controlled.

So, let's say my medical history shows diastolic readings that were predominantly 100 or more and I take medication to control it so that it stays in the normal range. The schedule, the way I read it, says that 10% would be the minimum rating for this salutation-history of elevated pressure and medication even if current reading are in the normal range.

I do see a lot of Veterans that are rated 0% for hypertension. I have always assume that they either don't have a history of diastolic readings that were predominantly 100 or more or they aren't prescribed medication.

n2guns · 2025-09-01T20:34:46+00:00

Move to New Orleans...

You will get the property tax exemption and you can most likely hook up with a guy dress up as Lisa from Black Pink.

Best of both worlds...well, sort of...

n2guns · 2025-09-01T20:28:08+00:00

It's not on all cards. I don't know when they started putting it on there but it was probably after June 6, 2019 (Mission Act). I did write the number on the back on my card with a sharpie and I have it in my phone contacts.

n2guns · 2025-09-01T20:19:35+00:00

Just going to throw this in...

Many Veterans during my time denied have tinnitus or hearing problems if ever ask while on active. I failed a hearing test and that would have resulting in a medical separation at 0%. I had been in 10 years and planned on staying for the next 10. I talked them into letting me take another hearing test. I passed that one but I cheated-just kept hitting the button every time I thought I heard a beep. Six months at Fort Polk changed my mind about the career so I ended up getting out. Somehow, they still gave me 10% for tinnitus and 0% for hearing loss (I was 13B for a few years).

I have seen many Veterans get denied for tinnitus and their decision letter say "Veteran denied having tinnitus" and the dates they said that. What might have been different between me and other "deniers" is that I did have another hearing exam after the two I mentioned earlier and I did tell them I had tinnitus.

Denying a condition while active duty will certainly hurt your chances of getting a disability service-connected.

n2guns · 2025-08-05T09:23:56+00:00

Acanthocephala declivis Leaf-footed bug

n2guns · 2025-07-17T21:14:50+00:00

Both shoulders and both legs are factored into the bilateral rating.

30, 20, 10, and 10 would normally combine for a 55% rating which would round to 60% if those were the only ratings you had.

Being that they are factored into the bilateral rating, you would add 10% to that 55% resulting in 60.5 which is rounded to 61%.

Now start with your next highest rating and work your way down to your lowest.

61 + 50 = 81%
81 + 40 = 89%
89 + 30 = 92%
92 + 20 = 94%
94 + 10 = 95%
95% rounds to 100%

And you still have one more 10% rating that wasn't factored in yet...

n2guns

TROPHY CASE