VA denies TDIU (Total Disability based on Individual Unemployability) when it finds a requirement missing: your ratings do not meet the percentage rule and no extraschedular route applies, the work you did was substantially gainful rather than marginal, your work limits are not shown to come from service-connected disabilities, your work history is incomplete, or the evidence shows you can still do work that fits your education and skills. Each finding calls for different evidence, so start with your decision letter's stated reason and evidence list, not with a new pile of documents.
The underlying rules are in the TDIU eligibility guide.
What the Board data shows
In Claim Raven's analysis of 2024 to 2025 decisions by the Board of Veterans' Appeals, 453 decided TDIU records were 51.2% favorable (full or partial grants), 23.2% denied and 25.6% remanded (Claim Raven's Board statistics). These are Board appeal outcomes, a group of already-disputed claims, so they describe patterns, not your odds, and a remand is not a grant. Claim Raven's data does not classify enough TDIU denials to report their reasons; its study of Board denial reasons across all conditions covers the broader picture.
A fictional denial to practice on
The decision below is wholly fictional. It shows how to audit a letter, not what any real letter says.
Fictional decision excerpt: "Individual unemployability is denied. You meet the percentage criteria. The evidence shows you worked as a warehouse dispatcher through September 2025 with annual earnings above the Census one-person poverty threshold. Your statement reports reduced duties, but the record does not establish the nature of any protected employment. The examination describes limits on repetitive lifting, but does not explain how the service-connected back disability prevents the dispatch duties shown in the employer information. We considered your Form 21-8940, the employer's Form 21-4192, pay records for 2024 and 2025, and the August 2025 examination."
This invented letter concedes the percentage rule. Spending the next month proving the rating math again would miss its actual dispute: what the job involved, what was earned in each year, what support was provided, and what the service-connected condition did to those duties.
Audit the specific reason
| Reason in a real letter | Check in the evidence list and record | Gap to investigate | Do not assume |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage rule not met | Individual and combined ratings, effective dates, grouping under 4.16(a) | Whether 4.16(b) applies. A regional office should send such a case to VA's Director of Compensation Service for extraschedular consideration. On appeal, the Board may now decide extraschedular TDIU itself under Witkowski v. Collins, No. 24-0640 (Oct. 21, 2025). | That a lower combined rating ends every TDIU claim. |
| Form 21-8940 or work dates incomplete | The form, VA's request notices, your work timeline | A missing job, part-time or self-employment period, differing dates, or an unanswered VA request | That a guessed date makes the story tidier. |
| Employer form missing or inconsistent | Form 21-4192, your request log, payroll and schedules | Employer did not respond, or defined hours or the reason for leaving differently | That employer silence decides the claim. VA's manual says not to deny TDIU solely because an employer did not return the form. |
| Income shows work above the threshold | Each year's earned income and that year's Census threshold | A missed second job, the wrong year, or facts about a lower-income protected role | That any above-threshold wage rules out marginal employment on the facts. |
| Protected work not shown | Duties, concessions, performance standards, pay by year | What the employer did differently and what the job paid | That an ordinary accommodation proves protected work. LaBruzza v. McDonough, 37 Vet.App. 111 (2024), says an accommodation the Americans with Disabilities Act requires is generally not enough by itself, and that no single factor decides the question. |
| Job said to be within your abilities | Duties, attendance, help received, medical restrictions, education and training | Which required tasks you could do reliably, and how the limits map to this job | That a diagnosis or a bare "cannot work" answers the job question. |
| Age or conditions that are not service connected cited | Medical and work records by date | Which limits come from which condition, or from an unrelated layoff | That VA may weigh age. It may not (38 C.F.R. 4.19), and conditions that are not service connected do not count toward TDIU. |
| Social Security decision not controlling | The Social Security Administration decision and its exhibits | Medical or work facts in those exhibits that VA did not discuss | That a Social Security award decides TDIU. |
The court's opinion in Ray v. Wilkie explains why the analysis covers both income and your ability to do the physical and mental acts of work in your history. Tie each piece of evidence to the period and the reason actually in dispute.
Turn the letter into a one-page review sheet
| Exact sentence and page in your decision | VA evidence listed | Your record or correction, with page | New evidence, overlooked existing evidence, or open question? |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Copy only the relevant sentence] | [Cited records and dates] | [The precise conflicting or missing fact] | [Classify honestly before choosing a review] |
| [Next distinct reason] | [Documents] | [Record and page, or question] | [Classification] |
Read unfavorable facts as well as favorable ones. In the fictional letter, a new supervisor statement describing excused dispatcher duties would be new evidence, while a schedule already in VA's evidence list might support an argument that VA misread existing evidence. A medical provider can explain a functional restriction within clinical expertise; an employer can describe how the work was actually done.
A real denial: what the record showed and what it lacked
In Board decision A25092030 (October 23, 2025), the veteran had a 90 percent combined rating, including 70 percent for a psychiatric disorder, so he met the percentage rule. The Board denied TDIU. Two lessons in the decision apply to many TDIU records.
Your treatment notes describe your work. VA's August 2024 Higher-Level Review decision had found that he had not worked since October 2021, a favorable finding that normally binds the Board. The Board found that finding clearly and unmistakably wrong, relying on what he had told his own clinicians and VA: work "going well" in November 2021, working nights in January 2022, a part-time probation department job in April 2022, a lab job in June 2022, a family support worker job in December 2022, and a cleaning job described in a December 2022 statement. What you tell treating providers about work becomes evidence. Make your Form 21-8940 and statements match it, or explain the difference.
The docket choice closed the record. He chose the Board's direct review docket, which limited the Board to the evidence VA had when it issued the March 2024 rating decision. His attorney argued that he was only marginally employed through his sister, but that stayed an argument: the record held no income, hours or length of employment for the cleaning job, and VA's written requests in April and November 2023 for an updated Form 21-8940 had gone unanswered. The Board also found that his description of the cleaning job, "a no brain job" with little contact with others and an unanswered accommodation request, did not show protected work.
The Board also weighed the functional evidence. It found his service-connected conditions limited jobs that required dealing with other people or a high degree of focus, but did not prevent work without those demands. One missing pay stub did not decide the case.
| Question left open in that record | Where to look in your own file |
|---|---|
| What was earned, and over which dates? | Pay records and an employment timeline for the disputed period. |
| How much work was actually done? | Hours, duties, attendance, and a dated account from the employer or you. |
| What made the job different from ordinary work? | Actual concessions, help and performance expectations, with a firsthand source. |
| Did VA ask for updated information? | The request, your response and its confirmation, or an honest explanation of the gap. |
Choose a review after the evidence audit
The docket lesson applies to your choice. If your fix is new work evidence, such as pay records or an employer letter, choose a route that accepts it: a Supplemental Claim, or the Board's evidence submission or hearing docket. Higher-Level Review and the Board's direct review docket do not consider new evidence. Supplemental Claim vs. Higher-Level Review vs. Board appeal compares the three lanes and their deadlines; your decision notice states the deadlines that apply to you.
If you want help finding the exact reason in your letter, Claim Raven's Raven Eye reads an uploaded decision letter and points to the passages for you to check; each account gets one free starter analysis. It does not choose your review lane or replace an accredited representative. Claim Raven has a commercial interest in the tool.
Sources and scope
Checked September 23, 2026: 38 C.F.R. 4.16 and 4.19, the Witkowski v. Collins, LaBruzza v. McDonough and Ray v. Wilkie opinions, Board decision A25092030, VA's employer-request steps in M21-1, Part VIII, Subpart iv, Chapter 3, Section B, VA's pages on Board appeal options and Higher-Level Review, and the TDIU row of Claim Raven's Board statistics. The opening decision is fictional. This page covers TDIU work evidence, not every reason a disability claim can be denied.
How Is a VA Tinnitus Claim Denied? Common Reasons and What to Check
How to Prepare for a C&P Exam: Records, Examples, and a Day-Of Checklist
Employer Won't Complete VA Form 21-4192? What VA Does and What to Send