wages were paid to you and not your husband. (R. at 3). Because Plaintiffs tax records and the ledger submitted by her accountant are susceptible to multiple interpretations, and do not differentiate between Plaintiffs earnings and her husband’s, they are insufficient to support a finding that the wages claimed on the returns were in fact earned by Plaintiff and that FICA taxes were paid on them. As such, the Plaintiff did not meet the burden of proof and did not rebut the presumption that the SSA’s records of her wages are accurate. See Butts, 706 F.2d at 108 (claimant failed to carry his burden where he failed to provide any verification of allegedly omitted earnings); see also Gittens v. Secretary of Health and Human Servs., 1991 WL 99298, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18963 (E.D.N.Y.1991) (<HOLDING>). At her hearing, the ALJ gave Plaintiff an
holding a social security number is not private holding that a 75 drop in share price is insufficient to overcome the presumption recognizing presumption and finding that it was overcome holding evidence insufficient to overcome presumption of correctness holding that plaintiffs testimony is insufficient to overcome presumption of accuracy for social security earnings records