The rating schedule that actually governs a VA posttraumatic stress disorder evaluation today is not a “2026 PTSD rating change” article and is not a proposed rewrite of the mental-disorders schedule. It is 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9411, “Posttraumatic stress disorder,” using the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders printed in that same section. That formula is current law. The February 15, 2022 rewrite published at 87 Fed. Reg. 8498 is a proposed rule. It is not in effect.

Those two sentences decide more of a PTSD claim than most of what is circulating about new mental-health percentages. A claim, a supplemental claim, or an appeal is decided under the regulation that is in force when VA applies the schedule—not under a Federal Register proposal that never became a final rule. This post quotes the law that is in force, states the three service-connection elements in 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f), records that no final rule replacing the General Rating Formula was found as of August 18, 2026, and records what the 2022 proposal actually said. It does not predict a rating. It does not promise that a current evaluation will be kept or lost. It does not invent a dollar figure, a grant rate, or a testimonial.

Service connection is a separate question from the percentage

Diagnostic Code 9411 assigns a percentage after posttraumatic stress disorder is service-connected. It does not, by itself, establish service connection, an effective date, or entitlement to any particular combined evaluation. Those issues are decided under the rest of title 38, including 38 U.S.C. § 1110 or § 1131 (basic entitlement), 38 C.F.R. Part 3 (adjudication), and 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (effective dates). This post does not collapse those questions into the rating code.

38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f) states the service-connection rule for posttraumatic stress disorder. The 2024 annual Code of Federal Regulations (38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (2024), 7–1–24 edition) and the Legal Information Institute text of 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 print the same opening sentence. Quoted in full:

“Service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder requires medical evidence diagnosing the condition in accordance with § 4.125(a) of this chapter; a link, established by medical evidence, between current symptoms and an in-service stressor; and credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred.” 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f).

That is three elements. A current diagnosis that conforms to 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a). A medical link between current symptoms and an in-service stressor. Credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred. The rest of § 3.304(f) then states when the veteran's lay testimony alone may establish the occurrence of the claimed stressor, and what other evidence may corroborate an in-service personal assault.

38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a), as opened on the Legal Information Institute on August 18, 2026, begins: “If the diagnosis of a mental disorder does not conform to DSM-5 or is not supported by the findings on the examination report, the rating agency shall return the report to the examiner to substantiate the diagnosis.” The same paragraph incorporates the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (2013). The source note on that section is “[61 FR 52700, Oct. 8, 1996, as amended at 79 FR 45099, Aug. 4, 2014].”

When the veteran's lay testimony alone may establish the stressor

38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f) does not treat every claimed stressor the same way. After the three-element sentence, it states that the following provisions apply to claims for service connection of posttraumatic stress disorder diagnosed during service or based on the specified type of claimed stressor. The 2024 annual C.F.R. and the Legal Information Institute text print the same five paragraphs. They are quoted here without collapsing them into one rule.

Paragraph (f)(1): “If the evidence establishes a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder during service and the claimed stressor is related to that service, in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, and provided that the claimed stressor is consistent with the circumstances, conditions, or hardships of the veteran's service, the veteran's lay testimony alone may establish the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor.”

Paragraph (f)(2): “If the evidence establishes that the veteran engaged in combat with the enemy and the claimed stressor is related to that combat, in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, and provided that the claimed stressor is consistent with the circumstances, conditions, or hardships of the veteran's service, the veteran's lay testimony alone may establish the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor.”

Paragraph (f)(3): “If a stressor claimed by a veteran is related to the veteran's fear of hostile military or terrorist activity and a VA psychiatrist or psychologist, or a psychiatrist or psychologist with whom VA has contracted, confirms that the claimed stressor is adequate to support a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder and that the veteran's symptoms are related to the claimed stressor, in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, and provided the claimed stressor is consistent with the places, types, and circumstances of the veteran's service, the veteran's lay testimony alone may establish the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor.” The same paragraph then defines “fear of hostile military or terrorist activity”: “a veteran experienced, witnessed, or was confronted with an event or circumstance that involved actual or threatened death or serious injury, or a threat to the physical integrity of the veteran or others, such as from an actual or potential improvised explosive device; vehicle-imbedded explosive device; incoming artillery, rocket, or mortar fire; grenade; small arms fire, including suspected sniper fire; or attack upon friendly military aircraft, and the veteran's response to the event or circumstance involved a psychological or psycho-physiological state of fear, helplessness, or horror.”

Paragraph (f)(4): “If the evidence establishes that the veteran was a prisoner-of-war under the provisions of § 3.1(y) of this part and the claimed stressor is related to that prisoner-of-war experience, in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, and provided that the claimed stressor is consistent with the circumstances, conditions, or hardships of the veteran's service, the veteran's lay testimony alone may establish the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor.”

Paragraph (f)(5) addresses a claim based on in-service personal assault. It states that “evidence from sources other than the veteran's service records may corroborate the veteran's account of the stressor incident.” The examples printed in the regulation “include, but are not limited to: records from law enforcement authorities, rape crisis centers, mental health counseling centers, hospitals, or physicians; pregnancy tests or tests for sexually transmitted diseases; and statements from family members, roommates, fellow service members, or clergy.” It continues: “Evidence of behavior changes following the claimed assault is one type of relevant evidence that may be found in these sources.” The examples of behavior changes “include, but are not limited to: a request for a transfer to another military duty assignment; deterioration in work performance; substance abuse; episodes of depression, panic attacks, or anxiety without an identifiable cause; or unexplained economic or social behavior changes.” The same paragraph then states: “VA will not deny a posttraumatic stress disorder claim that is based on in-service personal assault without first advising the claimant that evidence from sources other than the veteran's service records or evidence of behavior changes may constitute credible supporting evidence of the stressor and allowing him or her the opportunity to furnish this type of evidence or advise VA of potential sources of such evidence.” It also states that VA “may submit any evidence that it receives to an appropriate medical or mental health professional for an opinion as to whether it indicates that a personal assault occurred.”

The source note on 38 C.F.R. § 3.304, as printed in the 2024 annual C.F.R., ends with “75 FR 39852, July 13, 2010.” That is the last published amendment shown on that official text. It is not a 2022 amendment. It is not a 2026 amendment.

Those paragraphs are stressor-proof rules. They are not a rating percentage. They do not assign 30 percent, 50 percent, 70 percent, or 100 percent. They decide whether the claimed in-service stressor may be established, including in some cases by lay testimony alone. Whether a particular file meets one of those paragraphs is a facts-and-evidence question. This firm will not invent a grant for a file it has not reviewed.

The regulation that assigns the percentage

38 C.F.R. § 4.130 is the “Schedule of ratings—Mental disorders.” Diagnostic Code 9411 sits in that schedule. The 2024 annual Code of Federal Regulations (38 C.F.R. § 4.130 (2024), 7–1–24 edition), the 2025 annual Code of Federal Regulations (38 C.F.R. § 4.130 (2025)), and the Legal Information Institute text of 38 C.F.R. § 4.130 all print the same General Rating Formula and the same source note: “[79 FR 45100, Aug. 4, 2014].” That source note is the last published amendment shown on those official texts. It is not a 2022 amendment. It is not a 2026 amendment.

The opening paragraph of § 4.130 states: “The nomenclature employed in this portion of the rating schedule is based upon the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM–5) (see § 4.125 for availability information).” It then states that rating agencies must be thoroughly familiar with that manual “to properly implement the directives in § 4.125 through § 4.129 and to apply the general rating formula for mental disorders in § 4.130.”

Diagnostic Code 9411 is printed as: “9411 Posttraumatic stress disorder.” Note 2 under the eating-disorder formula in the same section states: “Ratings under diagnostic codes 9201 to 9440 will be evaluated using the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders.” Diagnostic Code 9411 is inside that range.

The General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders, quoted in full from those official texts:

Total occupational and social impairment, due to such symptoms as: gross impairment in thought processes or communication; persistent delusions or hallucinations; grossly inappropriate behavior; persistent danger of hurting self or others; intermittent inability to perform activities of daily living (including maintenance of minimal personal hygiene); disorientation to time or place; memory loss for names of close relatives, own occupation, or own name. — 100

Occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood, due to such symptoms as: suicidal ideation; obsessional rituals which interfere with routine activities; speech intermittently illogical, obscure, or irrelevant; near-continuous panic or depression affecting the ability to function independently, appropriately and effectively; impaired impulse control (such as unprovoked irritability with periods of violence); spatial disorientation; neglect of personal appearance and hygiene; difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances (including work or a worklike setting); inability to establish and maintain effective relationships. — 70

Occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity due to such symptoms as: flattened affect; circumstantial, circumlocutory, or stereotyped speech; panic attacks more than once a week; difficulty in understanding complex commands; impairment of short- and long-term memory (e.g., retention of only highly learned material, forgetting to complete tasks); impaired judgment; impaired abstract thinking; disturbances of motivation and mood; difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. — 50

Occupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks (although generally functioning satisfactorily, with routine behavior, self-care, and conversation normal), due to such symptoms as: depressed mood, anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks (weekly or less often), chronic sleep impairment, mild memory loss (such as forgetting names, directions, recent events). — 30

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. — 10

A mental condition has been formally diagnosed, but symptoms are not severe enough either to interfere with occupational and social functioning or to require continuous medication. — 0

That is the whole formula that applies to Diagnostic Code 9411. Six levels. The words “due to such symptoms as” are in the regulation. The lists that follow those words are the lists printed in 38 C.F.R. § 4.130. This post does not add a seventh level. It does not replace “occupational and social impairment” with a five-domain score. It does not treat a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder, standing alone, as a 50 percent or 70 percent evaluation.

The 100 percent line is total occupational and social impairment, due to such symptoms as the regulation lists. The 70 percent line is occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood. The 50 percent line is occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity. The 30 percent line is occupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks, although generally functioning satisfactorily, with routine behavior, self-care, and conversation normal. The 10 percent line is 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. The 0 percent line is a formally diagnosed mental condition whose symptoms are not severe enough either to interfere with occupational and social functioning or to require continuous medication.

Whether a particular veteran's file meets one of those lines is a facts-and-evidence question. This firm will not invent a percentage for a file it has not reviewed, and this post will not pretend that the existence of a posttraumatic stress disorder diagnosis is, in every case, the end of the analysis. The regulation is the starting point. The claims file is the rest of the case.

38 C.F.R. § 4.129 is a discharge rule, not the ordinary rating formula

38 C.F.R. § 4.129 is a separate section. It is printed immediately before § 4.130. It is not Diagnostic Code 9411. The 2024 and 2025 annual C.F.R. texts state:

“When a mental disorder that develops in service as a result of a highly stressful event is severe enough to bring about the veteran's release from active military service, the rating agency shall assign an evaluation of not less than 50 percent and schedule an examination within the six month period following the veteran's discharge to determine whether a change in evaluation is warranted.” 38 C.F.R. § 4.129.

That sentence applies when the mental disorder develops in service as a result of a highly stressful event and is severe enough to bring about release from active military service. It is not a rule that every posttraumatic stress disorder claim starts at 50 percent. It is not a substitute for the General Rating Formula in § 4.130. The source note on § 4.129 is “[61 FR 52700, Oct. 8, 1996].”

The 2022 proposal is not law and is not in effect

On February 15, 2022, the Department of Veterans Affairs published, in the Federal Register, a proposed rule: “Schedule for Rating Disabilities: Mental Disorders,” 87 Fed. Reg. 8498 (Feb. 15, 2022) (RIN 2900–AQ82). The document's own caption is “ACTION: Proposed rule.” The comment window stated in that notice was: “VA must receive comments on or before April 18, 2022.”

A proposed rule is a notice of what an agency is considering. It does not amend the Code of Federal Regulations by being printed. It does not become the rating schedule because it has been discussed for four years. Until a final rule is published and takes effect, 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9411 and the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders, remain the law that is applied.

The 2022 proposed table, printed in that same notice, would replace the current occupational-and-social-impairment formula with five domains—cognition; interpersonal interactions and relationships; task completion and life activities; navigating environments; and self-care—scored by level of impairment. The proposed evaluation lines in that notice read:

Level 4 in one or more domains, or Level 3 in two or more domains — 100

Level 3 in one domain, or Level 2 in two or more domains — 70

Level 2 in one domain — 50

Level 1 in two or more domains — 30

Minimum rating — 10

87 Fed. Reg. at 8504–05.

That table is proposed text. It is not 38 C.F.R. § 4.130 as now printed. It would, if it ever became a final rule in that form, replace the current 0, 10, 30, 50, 70, and 100 percent occupational-and-social-impairment lines with a domain-score table and a stated “Minimum rating” of 10 percent. None of that has been adopted as a final rule. Quoting the proposal is not the same as applying it.

No final rule replacing the General Rating Formula was found as of August 18, 2026

The official texts were opened on August 18, 2026. The 2024 annual C.F.R. still prints the 2014 General Rating Formula. The 2025 annual C.F.R. still prints that same formula and the same source note, “[79 FR 45100, Aug. 4, 2014].” The Legal Information Institute text of 38 C.F.R. § 4.130 still prints those same criteria and the same source note. The 2022 document is still captioned a proposed rule. A search of Federal Register and GovInfo materials for a final rule under RIN 2900–AQ82 that replaces the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders did not locate one.

As of August 18, 2026, no final rule replacing 38 C.F.R. § 4.130 after the 2022 proposal was found in the official sources opened for this post. If a final rule is later published in the Federal Register with an effective date, that document—not this post, and not a secondary article—will be the source to read. Until then, the current General Rating Formula quoted above is the formula that the opened official texts show as in force.

This firm will not treat a blog post, a news story, or a “2026 PTSD rating change” explainer as a substitute for the Federal Register and the C.F.R. Secondary articles describing the proposal as still proposed are consistent with what the official texts show; they are not themselves the law.

A separate 2026 rulemaking under RIN 2900–AS49 addressed 38 C.F.R. § 4.10 (functional impairment / impact of medication). VA published an interim final rule and then rescinded it. The rescission is “Rescission of Interim Final Rule, Evaluative Rating: Impact of Medication,” 91 Fed. Reg. 9712 (Feb. 27, 2026) (RIN 2900–AS49), restoring the prior text of § 4.10. That rescission is not a rewrite of § 4.130. It is not Diagnostic Code 9411. It is not the 2022 mental-disorders proposal becoming law.

What this means for a claim, a denial, or an appeal—without promising a result

A posttraumatic stress disorder case is still a veterans disability case. The questions are the ordinary ones: diagnosis under 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a), the three elements in 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f), whether one of the stressor-proof paragraphs in § 3.304(f)(1)–(5) applies, the correct diagnostic code, the correct percentage under the General Rating Formula that is in force, the correct effective date, and, if the regional office has already decided the issue, the correct review lane (higher-level review, supplemental claim, or Board appeal) under 38 U.S.C. §§ 5104B, 5104C, and 7105 and 38 C.F.R. Part 3 and Part 20.

Current Diagnostic Code 9411 will not decide a case that has no diagnosis, no medical link, or no credible supporting evidence of the claimed stressor. The 2022 proposal will not decide a case that is being rated today. Treating those two authorities as if they were interchangeable is how a claim gets argued to the wrong text.

This firm does not tell a veteran that a 70 percent evaluation is assured because suicidal ideation appears in a treatment note, or that a 50 percent evaluation is assured because panic attacks appear more than once a week. It does not tell a veteran that a rating will be kept if the veteran retains counsel, or lost if the veteran does not. It does not invent a dollar figure, a grant rate, or a testimonial. The work is to read the file against 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f) and 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9411, and the rest of title 38, and to put the veteran in the review posture the statute actually provides.

If VA has already assigned a posttraumatic stress disorder evaluation, the next step is not a speech about a proposed rule. It is a decision review: whether the assigned percentage matches the criteria quoted above, whether the effective date is correct, whether service connection was denied on a ground that the record can answer, and whether the time to elect a review lane is still open. If no claim has been filed, the first question is still the claim—diagnosis, in-service stressor, medical link, and the evidence that makes the schedule applicable—not a prediction about a proposal that has not become law.

Disclaimer

This post is general information about veterans disability claims, appeals, and VA benefits. It is not legal advice, not a representation that The Jacks Law Group is your counsel, and not a prediction of any rating, grant, denial, effective date, or payment. No result is promised. Reading this post does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws, regulations, and pending rulemakings change; the sources listed below were opened on the dates stated and should be re-checked before they are relied on.

Retain this firm

If you have a VA posttraumatic stress disorder claim, a proposed or assigned evaluation under Diagnostic Code 9411, a denial of service connection, or a decision you intend to review, have the file read against the regulation that is actually in force. The Jacks Law Group represents veterans in disability claims and appeals. Call 702-834-6300. Do not wait for a proposed rule to become something it is not.

The Jacks Law Group
1057 Whitney Ranch Drive, Suite 350
Henderson, NV 89014
702-834-6300
https://www.TheJacksLawGroup.com

Source list (URLs and date checked)

All of the following were opened or re-opened on Tuesday, August 18, 2026 (Pacific Time), unless a narrower note appears.

38 C.F.R. § 4.130 (current Diagnostic Code 9411 and General Rating Formula). Legal Information Institute, https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/4.130 — opened August 18, 2026. Full General Rating Formula quoted above. Source note on that page: “[79 FR 45100, Aug. 4, 2014].” Diagnostic Code 9411 printed as “Posttraumatic stress disorder.”

38 C.F.R. § 4.130 (2024 annual edition). GovInfo PDF, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2024-title38-vol1/pdf/CFR-2024-title38-vol1-sec4-130.pdf — opened August 18, 2026. Header: “38 CFR Ch. I (7–1–24 Edition).” Same General Rating Formula; same source note “[79 FR 45100, Aug. 4, 2014].”

38 C.F.R. § 4.130 (2025 annual edition). GovInfo PDF, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2025-title38-vol1/pdf/CFR-2025-title38-vol1-sec4-130.pdf — opened August 18, 2026. Same General Rating Formula; same source note “[79 FR 45100, Aug. 4, 2014].”

38 C.F.R. § 4.125 (diagnosis of mental disorders). Legal Information Institute, https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/4.125 — opened August 18, 2026. Paragraph (a) quoted above. Source note: “[61 FR 52700, Oct. 8, 1996, as amended at 79 FR 45099, Aug. 4, 2014].”

38 C.F.R. § 4.129 (mental disorders due to traumatic stress). 2024 and 2025 annual C.F.R. texts opened August 18, 2026, in the same GovInfo PDFs as § 4.130. Sentence quoted above. Source note: “[61 FR 52700, Oct. 8, 1996].”

38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f) (PTSD service connection). Legal Information Institute, https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.304 — opened August 18, 2026. Three-element sentence and paragraphs (f)(1)–(5) quoted above.

38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (2024 annual edition). GovInfo PDF, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2024-title38-vol1/pdf/CFR-2024-title38-vol1-sec3-304.pdf — opened August 18, 2026. Header: “38 CFR Ch. I (7–1–24 Edition).” Same § 3.304(f) text. Source note ends with “75 FR 39852, July 13, 2010.”

2022 proposed rule (not in effect). “Schedule for Rating Disabilities: Mental Disorders,” 87 Fed. Reg. 8498 (Feb. 15, 2022) (RIN 2900–AQ82; ACTION: Proposed rule; comments due April 18, 2022), https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-02-15/html/2022-02051.htm — opened August 18, 2026. Proposed General Rating Formula table at 87 Fed. Reg. 8504–05.

Search for a final rule replacing 38 C.F.R. § 4.130 after 2022. GovInfo / Federal Register materials search for a final rule under RIN 2900–AQ82 — conducted August 18, 2026. No final rule replacing the General Rating Formula was found. The 2022 document remains captioned a proposed rule.

2026 rescission of a different rule (not a rewrite of § 4.130). “Rescission of Interim Final Rule, Evaluative Rating: Impact of Medication,” 91 Fed. Reg. 9712 (Feb. 27, 2026) (RIN 2900–AS49), https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-02-27/pdf/2026-03940.pdf — opened August 18, 2026. Restores prior 38 C.F.R. § 4.10. It is not Diagnostic Code 9411 and is not RIN 2900–AQ82.

eCFR current 38 C.F.R. § 4.130. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-38/chapter-I/part-4/subpart-B/subject-group-ECFRfa6e3d8692637d6/section-4.130 — attempted August 18, 2026; not used. The site returned an automated-access / CAPTCHA block. Current-text reliance is on the Legal Information Institute text and the 2024 and 2025 annual C.F.R. PDFs instead.