How to Fill Out Form SSA-1693 (w/Examples) + FAQs

Form SSA-1693 is the Social Security Administration’s Fee Agreement for Representation of a Claimant, and you fill it out by entering the claimant’s identifying information, the representative’s information, the agreed fee terms (capped by federal law), and the signatures of both parties before filing it with SSA. The form tells the agency that the claimant and the representative have agreed in writing on how the representative will be paid out of past-due benefits if the claim wins. Without this signed form on file before SSA issues a favorable decision, the representative cannot use the streamlined fee agreement process and must instead file a fee petition under 42 U.S.C. § 406.

The problem the form solves is simple. Federal law forbids any person from charging or collecting a fee for representing a Social Security claimant unless SSA approves that fee in writing under the rules in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1720 and 20 C.F.R. § 416.1520. A representative who collects a fee without approval can face suspension, disqualification, and criminal penalties of up to one year in prison and a $500 fine.

According to SSA’s Annual Performance Report, more than 60% of disability claimants at the hearing level use a representative, and the Government Accountability Office has reported that represented claimants win at higher rates than unrepresented claimants. That makes Form SSA-1693 one of the most-used administrative forms in the federal disability system.

Here is what you will learn in this guide:

• 📝 How to complete every line of Form SSA-1693 the right way the first time
• ⚖️ How federal fee caps under the Social Security Act limit what your representative can charge
• 💵 How past-due benefits are calculated and withheld for direct payment
• 🧾 How SSA-1693 differs from Form SSA-1696 and the fee petition process
• 🚫 How to avoid the most common mistakes that delay fee approval or void the agreement

What Form SSA-1693 Is and Why It Exists

Form SSA-1693 is the official Fee Agreement for Representation of a Claimant. It documents the contract between a Social Security claimant and the person who agrees to represent that claimant before SSA. The form is a creature of federal statute, not a private contract, because Section 206 of the Social Security Act gives SSA exclusive authority to approve any fee charged for representational services in proceedings before the agency.

The form exists to protect three parties at once. It protects the claimant from being overcharged by capping the fee. It protects the representative by giving them a clear, faster path to payment directly out of past-due benefits. It protects SSA’s process by ensuring every fee paid in a Title II or Title XVI claim is reviewed and approved.

The fee agreement process under Section 206(a)(2) is faster and cheaper than the fee petition process. If the agreement meets the statutory tests, SSA approves it almost automatically when the claim is favorably decided. If it fails any test, SSA disapproves the agreement, and the representative must instead file a fee petition on Form SSA-1560 to get paid.

A common misconception is that SSA-1693 is just a private contract. It is not. It is a regulated filing under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1707, and SSA can reject it for technical defects. The consequence of a defective agreement is that the representative loses the streamlined approval path and must wait months for a fee petition decision.

The Statutory Fee Cap

The fee agreement process has a hard ceiling set by the Commissioner of Social Security. Under the SSA notice published November 26, 2024, the maximum fee under the fee agreement process rose to $9,200, effective November 30, 2024. That cap applies whether the case settles at the initial level or after an Administrative Law Judge hearing.

The cap is the lower of two numbers: 25% of past-due benefits, or $9,200. If 25% of past-due benefits is $7,000, the fee is $7,000. If 25% of past-due benefits is $15,000, the fee is capped at $9,200. The remaining money goes to the claimant.

A common misconception is that the representative can charge more than the cap by getting the claimant to sign a waiver. That is false. Any agreement that exceeds the cap will be disapproved by SSA, and the representative will be forced into the fee petition process instead, where SSA reviews the work line-by-line.

Who Uses This Form

Both attorneys and eligible non-attorney representatives use Form SSA-1693. To qualify for direct payment from SSA, a non-attorney must be on the EDPNA roster maintained under the rules of 20 C.F.R. § 404.1717, which requires a bachelor’s degree or equivalent, a passing score on the EDPNA exam, liability insurance, a clean background check, and continuing education.

Attorneys in good standing with any state bar may represent a claimant without joining the EDPNA roster, but they must still be registered with SSA and have a Representative Identification Number (Rep ID). The consequence of using SSA-1693 without proper registration is that SSA will not direct-pay the fee and the agreement may be disapproved.

A real example: Maria, a paralegal in Chicago, agrees to represent her neighbor’s SSDI claim. Because Maria is not on the EDPNA roster and is not a licensed attorney, she cannot receive direct payment, and any fee agreement she signs will be disapproved. The consequence is that Maria must collect any fee directly from the claimant, which most claimants cannot afford.

Line-by-Line Walkthrough of Form SSA-1693

The current version of Form SSA-1693 is two pages plus instructions. Every line matters because a missing or wrong entry can cause SSA to reject the agreement under POMS GN 03940.003. Read the instructions on the form before you put pen to paper.

The form is organized into four logical zones: claimant identification, representative identification, fee terms, and signatures. The fee terms section is where most agreements fail because the language must mirror the regulatory standard.

Section 1: Claimant Information

Enter the claimant’s full legal name exactly as it appears on the Social Security card. Then enter the claimant’s Social Security Number. If the claim is for a child or for an adult disabled child on a parent’s record, enter the wage earner’s SSN as well, because Title II auxiliary benefits are paid on the wage earner’s record under 20 C.F.R. § 404.350.

A common mistake is using a nickname or married name that does not match SSA’s records. The consequence is that SSA’s electronic systems cannot match the agreement to the claim file, and the agreement may not be considered when the favorable decision is issued.

A real example: David Lee applies for SSDI but his SSA records still show “David Lee Jr.” The fee agreement uses “David Lee,” and the ALJ’s favorable decision references “David Lee Jr.” The mismatch delays fee approval by six weeks while the field office reconciles the record.

Section 2: Representative Information

Enter the representative’s full name, business address, telephone number, and Rep ID. Check the box that identifies the representative as an attorney or non-attorney, and check the eligible-for-direct-payment box if applicable. The Rep ID is assigned by SSA when the representative registers through the Appointed Representative Services portal.

If the case is handled by a firm rather than a sole practitioner, the form must list the individual representing the claimant, not just the firm. Under POMS GN 03920.017, only individuals can be appointed as representatives in SSA proceedings, and direct payment can only be assigned to the principal representative, who can then assign it to an entity if the SSA-1695 registration links the entity.

A common misconception is that the firm name alone is enough. It is not. The consequence of leaving off the individual’s name is that SSA may treat the appointment as defective, and no fee can be approved or paid through the agreement process.

Section 3: Fee Agreement Terms

This is the heart of the form. The pre-printed language states that the fee will be the lesser of 25% of past-due benefits or the cap set by the Commissioner. Both parties must agree to this exact language for the agreement to qualify under Section 206(a)(2)(A).

If the parties write in extra terms — for example, a flat fee, an hourly rate, or a fee based on future benefits — the agreement will fail the statutory test. The consequence is automatic disapproval, and the representative must file a fee petition. Future benefits cannot be the basis of the fee under the agreement process because the statute defines the fee in terms of past-due benefits only.

A common misconception is that the representative can add a clause requiring the claimant to pay the difference if SSA caps the fee below the contingency rate. That clause is unenforceable in SSA proceedings under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1740(c)(2), and trying to collect on it can be grounds for sanctions.

Section 4: Expenses

The form distinguishes fees from expenses. Fees are payment for the representative’s time and services. Expenses are out-of-pocket costs such as medical record copies, expert reports, and postage. Expenses are not subject to SSA approval under POMS GN 03920.001 and may be collected directly from the claimant.

The form has a section for the parties to identify any expenses the claimant must reimburse. A common mistake is to lump expenses into the fee, which can cause SSA to disapprove the agreement because the fee total then exceeds the cap.

A real example: Tanya, an attorney in Atlanta, advances $850 in medical record fees for her client James. The fee agreement separately states that James will reimburse documented expenses. When James wins $40,000 in past-due benefits, SSA approves the $9,200 fee, and Tanya separately bills James for the $850 in expenses without any SSA review.

Section 5: Signatures and Date

Both the claimant and the representative must sign and date the form. If there is a co-representative — a second attorney or EDPNA in the same case — the co-representative must also sign. Under POMS GN 03940.001, all representatives expecting a share of the fee must sign the same agreement, or the case falls out of the fee agreement process.

A common mistake is signing the agreement after SSA issues the favorable decision. The agreement must be filed before the favorable decision under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1730(b). The consequence of late filing is that the fee agreement process is unavailable, and the representative must file a fee petition.

How SSA-1693 Differs From Other Representation Forms

Many claimants and new representatives confuse the three core SSA representation forms. Each has a distinct purpose, and using the wrong one or skipping one is a frequent reason fees are delayed or denied. The table below shows the differences clearly.

Form	Purpose
SSA-1696	Appoints the representative; required for the rep to act on the claim
SSA-1693	Sets the fee terms under the streamlined fee agreement process
SSA-1560	Fee petition; used after the case ends when no fee agreement was filed or the agreement was disapproved

Form SSA-1696 is the appointment form. Without it, SSA will not even speak to the representative, much less pay them. The consequence of skipping SSA-1696 is that everything the representative did is treated as unauthorized, and no fee can be approved.

Form SSA-1560 is the fallback. It is used when the fee agreement process is unavailable or fails. Under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1725, SSA evaluates the petition based on time spent, complexity, results, and the representative’s skill. The fee petition process is not subject to the $9,200 cap, but it is far slower and the representative must justify every hour billed.

A real example: Carlos, an attorney in Phoenix, represents a claimant whose past-due benefits will be around $80,000. Because 25% of $80,000 is $20,000 — far above the cap — Carlos may choose to file a fee petition under SSA-1560 instead of SSA-1693, hoping for an award above $9,200 based on the hours and complexity.

Title II vs. Title XVI vs. Concurrent Claims

The fee approval mechanics differ by program. Title II is SSDI and related insurance benefits. Title XVI is SSI, the needs-based program. Concurrent claims involve both.

For Title II claims, SSA withholds 25% of past-due benefits for direct payment to the representative under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1730. For Title XVI claims, Section 1631(d)(2) authorizes the same 25% withholding for direct payment, a feature added by the Social Security Protection Act of 2004.

In concurrent claims, SSA must apply the windfall offset before fees are calculated. Under 20 C.F.R. § 404.408b, retroactive SSDI benefits are reduced by the SSI the claimant would not have received but for the SSDI delay. The consequence is that fees in concurrent cases are often lower than the parties expect, because past-due benefits shrink after the offset is computed.

A real example: Aisha wins a concurrent claim with $30,000 in retroactive SSDI and $14,000 in retroactive SSI. After the windfall offset reduces the SSDI past-due figure to $18,000, the 25% calculation produces a fee of $4,500 — not the $7,500 the parties expected from the original SSDI number.

Three Real-World Filing Scenarios

Below are the three scenarios most representatives encounter. Each shows the fee result and the lesson.

Scenario	Fee Outcome
Initial-level approval, $20,000 past-due SSDI	25% = $5,000, paid directly from withheld funds
ALJ favorable decision, $60,000 past-due SSDI	Capped at $9,200, the rest released to the claimant
SSI-only approval, $12,000 past-due SSI	25% = $3,000, withheld and direct-paid under Title XVI

Each scenario assumes the form is correctly filled out, filed before the favorable decision, and signed by all parties. If any of those conditions fails, the fee agreement process is unavailable and the result changes.

Filing Defect	Consequence
Form filed after favorable decision	Disapproval; fee petition required
Fee terms exceed the cap	Disapproval; fee petition required
Co-representative did not sign	Disapproval; fee petition required

These tables illustrate why technical compliance matters. SSA does not allow informal fixes after a favorable decision is issued under POMS GN 03940.003.

Three Named Examples That Show the Rules in Action

Real examples make abstract rules concrete. The three below cover an attorney, a non-attorney, and a federal-court extension.

Sandra, an attorney in Houston, files SSA-1693 the same day her client signs SSA-1696. Six months later, the ALJ issues a favorable decision awarding $48,000 in past-due benefits. SSA withholds $12,000, applies the cap, and direct-pays Sandra $9,200. The remaining $2,800 of the withheld amount is released to the client.

Marcus, an EDPNA in Denver, represents a client on a concurrent claim. He files SSA-1693 properly, but he forgets to register with SSA’s Appointed Representative Services portal. The fee agreement is approved, but direct payment is denied because Marcus is not currently registered for direct payment. He must collect from the client directly, which delays his fee by a year.

Priya, an attorney in New York, wins her client’s case in federal district court after SSA twice denied benefits. Under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) and the Supreme Court’s decision in Culbertson v. Berryhill, the 25% cap on agency-level fees and the 25% cap on court-level fees are separate caps. Priya uses SSA-1693 for the agency work and a separate Section 406(b) motion for the court work, recovering fees under both.

Mistakes to Avoid When Filling Out SSA-1693

Filing mistakes are the single biggest cause of fee delays. The following list covers the most damaging errors and what each one costs you.

• Filing the form after the favorable decision; the agreement is disapproved under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1730
• Writing fee language that exceeds the cap; SSA disapproves automatically and forces a fee petition
• Lumping expenses into the fee; the inflated total triggers disapproval
• Failing to list a co-representative who expects a share; the entire agreement is disqualified under POMS GN 03940.001
• Using a firm name instead of an individual representative; appointment is defective
• Forgetting the Rep ID; SSA cannot match the form to the registration record
• Failing to register for direct payment via SSA-1699; fee approved but not direct-paid
• Using a name that does not match SSA records; payment is delayed
• Adding clauses that try to collect future benefits; the agreement fails the statutory test
• Not giving the claimant a copy of the signed form; violates 20 C.F.R. § 404.1707

Each mistake has the same broad consequence: lost time, lost money, and possible referral to SSA’s Office of the General Counsel for sanctions in serious cases.

Do’s and Don’ts

The following lists capture the practical rules that experienced representatives follow on every case.

Do’s:

• Do file SSA-1693 together with SSA-1696 to avoid timing problems, because the appointment must be on file for the agreement to be reviewed
• Do check that the claimant’s name matches SSA records exactly so the agreement can be electronically matched to the claim
• Do separately list expenses to keep the fee number clean for the cap test
• Do confirm your Rep ID is active in ARdR before filing because an inactive ID blocks direct payment
• Do give the claimant a signed copy at the time of signing because 20 C.F.R. § 404.1707 requires a copy be furnished

Don’ts:

• Don’t add fee language that exceeds the cap because SSA will reject the agreement and force a fee petition
• Don’t sign the form after a favorable decision because the agreement process is closed at that point
• Don’t try to charge fees on auxiliary benefits without SSA approval because all fees in SSA proceedings need approval under Section 206
• Don’t use SSA-1693 for federal-court fees because court-level fees fall under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) and require a separate motion
• Don’t forget to update SSA when the firm or address changes because outdated info can break direct payment

Pros and Cons of the Fee Agreement Process

The fee agreement route is faster but has hard ceilings. The fee petition route is slower but has no statutory cap. Choose based on case size and complexity.

Pros:

• Fast SSA approval, often within weeks of the favorable decision
• Predictable fee tied to a clean 25% formula
• Direct payment from withheld past-due benefits
• Lower administrative burden because no time records are required
• Simple to explain to claimants, which builds trust

Cons:

• Hard cap of $9,200 limits earnings on large cases
• Only past-due benefits count, not future benefits
• Any non-conforming clause voids the streamlined process
• Co-representatives must coordinate or the agreement fails
• Concurrent claims with windfall offset shrink the fee base

How Past-Due Benefits and Direct Payment Work

Past-due benefits are the retroactive amount SSA owes the claimant from the date entitlement begins through the month before SSA issues the favorable decision. Under 20 C.F.R. § 404.1703, past-due benefits do not include continuing monthly benefits. The fee is calculated only against this retroactive lump sum.

SSA withholds 25% of past-due benefits for potential fee payment. If the approved fee is less than the withheld amount, SSA releases the excess to the claimant. If the approved fee equals the withheld amount, SSA pays it all to the representative. The user fee — currently capped at $117 per direct payment under POMS GN 03920.019 — is deducted from the representative’s payment, not from the claimant’s benefits.

A real example: Liam is approved for SSDI with $40,000 in past-due benefits. SSA withholds $10,000. The fee agreement caps the fee at $9,200. SSA pays Liam’s attorney $9,200 minus the $117 user fee, for a net of $9,083, and releases $800 of the withheld $10,000 back to Liam.

A common misconception is that the user fee is negotiable. It is not. Congress set it under Section 206(d), and SSA adjusts it annually for inflation.

Federal Court Fees and the Culbertson Rule

Some cases continue past SSA into federal district court. The Supreme Court in Culbertson v. Berryhill, 139 S. Ct. 517 (2019) held that the 25% cap in Section 406(a) — which covers agency-level work — is separate from the 25% cap in Section 406(b), which covers court-level work. Each cap is its own ceiling.

That means a representative who wins at both levels can collect up to 25% of past-due benefits for agency work plus up to 25% for court work, subject to court approval. SSA-1693 only covers the agency-level fee. Court-level fees require a separate fee motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54 within the time set by the local rules.

A common mistake is to assume SSA-1693 covers both stages. It does not. The consequence of that mistake is a missed deadline in district court and a permanent loss of the court-level fee.

State Nuances

Although SSA-1693 is governed by federal law, state rules still affect the practice around it. State bar fee-sharing rules, for example, control whether an attorney can split a fee with a non-attorney representative within the same firm. Most states follow ABA Model Rule 5.4, which prohibits fee splitting with non-lawyers except in narrow circumstances.

State tax law also matters because direct-paid representative fees are reported on IRS Form 1099-MISC by SSA, and state income tax rules vary. A representative in California faces different state withholding obligations than one in Texas, where there is no state income tax. The consequence of ignoring state tax rules is an unexpected tax bill at the end of the year.

State licensing rules govern who can call themselves an attorney. A non-attorney representative who advertises legal services in a state that defines that practice broadly — such as California Business and Professions Code § 6125 — can face unauthorized-practice-of-law charges, even when the underlying work is federal SSA representation.

Recap of Key Rulings and Authorities

A handful of decisions and regulations shape every SSA-1693 filing today. Culbertson v. Berryhill established the dual-cap rule for agency and court-level fees. Gisbrecht v. Barnhart, 535 U.S. 789 (2002) upheld the validity of contingent-fee agreements in SSA cases under Section 406(b). Hopkins v. Cohen, 390 U.S. 530 (1968) confirmed that auxiliary benefits count toward past-due benefits for fee calculation purposes.

The regulatory backbone is 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart R for Title II and 20 C.F.R. Part 416, Subpart O for Title XVI. The day-to-day operating instructions are in POMS GN 03900–03970, which SSA staff use to evaluate every fee agreement.

A common misconception is that POMS provisions are mere guidance with no force. While POMS is not formally binding on courts, SSA adjudicators follow it strictly, and a representative who ignores POMS will see agreements disapproved at the field office level even if the statute and regulations technically allow the result.

FAQs

Is SSA-1693 the same as SSA-1696?

No. SSA-1696 appoints the representative to act on the claim. SSA-1693 sets the fee terms. Both forms are usually filed together, but they serve different legal purposes under SSA’s rules.

Can I file SSA-1693 online?

Yes. SSA accepts the form through the Appointed Representative Services portal, by fax to the servicing office, by mail, or in person. The online route is fastest because it is logged into the electronic claim file immediately.

Does SSA-1693 cover federal court fees?

No. SSA-1693 covers only fees for representation before SSA. Court-level fees fall under 42 U.S.C. § 406(b) and require a separate fee motion in the district court that decided the case.

Can a representative charge more than the cap?

No. Under the fee agreement process, the maximum is the lesser of 25% of past-due benefits or $9,200. Any agreement exceeding the cap is disapproved, and the representative must file a fee petition instead.

Are expenses included in the fee cap?

No. Expenses such as medical record copies and expert reports are separate from the fee. They are not subject to SSA approval and may be billed directly to the claimant under POMS GN 03920.001.

Does the claimant pay anything out of pocket?

No. In a typical contingency case, the fee is paid out of withheld past-due benefits. The claimant pays nothing up front. Expenses, however, may be reimbursed separately.

Can a non-attorney use SSA-1693?

Yes. Eligible non-attorney representatives on the EDPNA roster may use the form and receive direct payment. Non-attorneys not on the roster may represent claimants but cannot receive direct payment from SSA.

Is the fee cap the same in every state?

Yes. The cap is set by the federal Commissioner of Social Security and applies nationwide. State law does not change the cap, although state bar rules can affect fee-sharing within a firm.

Does SSI count for fee purposes?

Yes. Title XVI past-due benefits count, and SSA may withhold 25% for direct payment under Section 1631(d)(2), a feature added by the Social Security Protection Act of 2004.

Can the agreement be amended after signing?

Yes. The parties may sign a new agreement before the favorable decision is issued. After the decision, no amendments are accepted under the fee agreement process; the original terms or a fee petition control.

Does the user fee come out of the claimant’s money?

No. The user fee is deducted from the representative’s direct payment, not from the claimant’s benefits. It is currently capped at $117 per direct payment under POMS GN 03920.019.

What happens if SSA disapproves the agreement?

No fee can be collected under the agreement, but the representative may still file a fee petition on SSA-1560. The petition asks SSA to set a reasonable fee based on hours worked and results obtained.