Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As part of our family retirement planning, I was curious what the "capitalized value of my SS benefits" was on a non-cola basis.
If all goes according to Hoyle it should be worth $1,511,000 in today's Dollars.
I have one of those "Modern Families" that require numerous calculations to find "maximum benefit amount".
Here are my data points behind the number:
62 y/o Male
34 y/o spouse non-citizen
2 children aged 10 and 1
Husband claims SS at 62 $1500.00 monthly
Children receive family benefit $1800.00 monthly
Age 66 Husband suspends benefit until age 70 (receiving 8 % increase on age 62 reduced benefit)
at age 70 restarts SS at FRA benefit of $1800.00 monthly
When child 1 reaches 18 and loses benefit, spouse collects $900.00 monthly until child 2 turns 16.
When spouse turns 62 she collects 32% of husbands FRA $700.00
Five years later husband dies (96) and spouse is 67 and collects husbands $1800 benefit for approx 23 years.
Husbands total $633,600
Child 1 total $ 86,000
Child 2 total $ 189,000
Spouse total $602,000
Family Total= 1,511,000
However, there is a limit to the amount of money that
can be paid to a family. The family maximum
payment is determined as part of every Social
Security benefit computation and can be
from 150 to 180 percent of the parent’s full
benefit amount. If the total amount payable to
all family members exceeds this limit, each
person’s benefit is reduced proportionately
(except the parent’s) until the total equals the
maximum allowable amount.
Like most things Hoyle named the joker the deck is that SS is unsustainable and likely as usual to reach crisis stage before acted on. Might want to read the SS trustee report before putting too many eggs in that basket in planning. Certainly this is a case that immediately called for life insurance as part of any plan when first married on husband.
A
Husband claims SS at 62 $1500.00 monthly
Children receive family benefit $1800.00 monthly
Age 66 Husband suspends benefit until age 70 (receiving 8 % increase on age 62 reduced benefit)
at age 70 restarts SS at FRA benefit of $1800.00 monthly
When spouse turns 62 she collects 32% of husbands FRA $700.00
If husband files at age 62, his benefit is permanently reduced. He will not subsequently get the FRA benefit or 8% increase.
And as MPRetired as pointed out, the children's and wife's combined monthly benefit would be in the range of $750-$1200, half or less of the $2500 you calculated.
Last edited by biscuitmom; 12-24-2013 at 12:10 PM..
Like most things Hoyle named the joker the deck is that SS is unsustainable and likely as usual to reach crisis stage before acted on. Might want to read the SS trustee report before putting too many eggs in that basket in planning. Certainly this is a case that immediately called for life insurance as part of any plan when first married on husband.
I understand your point but failure to plan is even worse. We just plan for a future 25% reduction in benefits. Hopefully not but planned for. Should not be counted on we agree.
All numbers are based on the family maximum of 180% of my FRA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav
Like most things Hoyle named the joker the deck is that SS is unsustainable and likely as usual to reach crisis stage before acted on. Might want to read the SS trustee report before putting too many eggs in that basket in planning. Certainly this is a case that immediately called for life insurance as part of any plan when first married on husband.
The numbers will be what they will be, I have been retired for 26 years and 2 months, so I know how to plan and adapt to changes. This is just a simple exercise to help me determine what assets I will have at various ages and how to use/invest them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by biscuitmom
If husband files at age 62, his benefit is permanently reduced. He will not subsequently get the FRA benefit or 8% increase.
And as MPRetired as pointed out, the children's and wife's combined monthly benefit would be in the range of $750-$1200, half or less of the $2500 you calculated.
Wrong on both counts!
I have verified that I can suspend at 66 and my age 62 benefit will increase at 8% for the four years and will be a few hundred a month higher than my FRA. I can quote citation later.
My Childrens benefit will be $972.00 each or 1940.00 ( I calculated using the lower $1800.00), I do not know where the $2500 you used came from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP
I understand your point but failure to plan is even worse. We just plan for a future 25% reduction in benefits. Hopefully not but planned for. Should not be counted on we agree.
I agree with you and thank you for the other thread where I found out my spouse could collect 32% of my FRA when she hit's 62!
How is it that the children of a man in his 60's receive SS unless the man is physically disabled? (We already know he has some odd behavior issues...he perhaps should have adopted his child wife, rather than had children with her? But to each his own.)
How is it that the children of a man in his 60's receive SS unless the man is physically disabled? (We already know he has some odd behavior issues...he perhaps should have adopted his child wife, rather than had children with her? But to each his own.)
Sorry for the cynical tone but really? a hero?
Because the law allows it.
It was originally put in place for different reasons but society changes over time and the laws were not adjusted.
How is it that the children of a man in his 60's receive SS unless the man is physically disabled? (We already know he has some odd behavior issues...he perhaps should have adopted his child wife, rather than had children with her? But to each his own.)
Sorry for the cynical tone but really? a hero?
Because the law allows it.
It was originally put in place for different reasons but society changes over time and the laws were not adjusted.
Back in 1939 there were not a lot of seniors married to much younger women with minor children.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.