SS tactic, "file and suspend" under attack (spouse, social security, federal)

[boater1]

Anyone who has or is thinking of using the "file and suspend" for SS benefits should keep an eye on Obama and Congress.

The Obama admin is saying that this tactic is cheating SS and is only used by wealthier couples.

They are reviewing this tactic.
Only Congress can actually make any changes to SS, so the Obama admin would have to get Congress to change it.

This is when a married couple, has both partners working, the higher income person files for SS and immediately suspends benefits.

But this allows the spouse to start collecting spousal benfits, which are half the suspended benefit amount.

this is a completly legal tactic to maximize SS benefits allowed since about 2000.

[Sojj]

Which has been used disproportionately by higher income couples.

Your point is???

[Heidi60]

I really can't say who is using the tactic but, to me, it does favor those who can afford and it should be removed or subject to means testing.

[marcopolo]

Originally Posted by Sojj

Which has been used disproportionately by higher income couples.

Your point is???

Oh, you mean those higher income couples who get very little bang for the buck on their social security contributions compared to lower income couples, right?

Funny when people figure out creative ways to qualify for food stamps or heat assistance or free cell phones or whatever, they are just going by the rules--yet when the ones footing most of the bills for everybody else seek to improve their own position, it is some kind of problem.

This is just chapter 39 of the book, "You Didn't Build That" by Barack Obama.

[jlawrence01]

Originally Posted by boater1

Anyone who has or is thinking of using the "file and suspend" for SS benefits should keep an eye on Obama and Congress.

The Obama admin is saying that this tactic is cheating SS and is only used by wealthier couples.

They are reviewing this tactic.
Only Congress can actually make any changes to SS, so the Obama admin would have to get Congress to change it.

And Congress is up for reelection every TWO years.

This is going NOWHERE.

[Teddy52]

Blast the proposal all you want but it is high time for someone to have the guts to address the problem SS is /will be facing.

Every time SS is discussed I think of Nero fiddling while Rome was burning.

[TuborgP]

And now a link to help those who like corroboration.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...A2O1H220140325

Are high-income Americans gaming Social Security? The Obama administration wants to go after the wealthy for "aggressive" moves to "manipulate" their Social Security claiming decisions, according to the fiscal 2015 budget released by the White House earlier this month.

The administration hasn't offered much elaboration, but a White House official, speaking on background, confirmed to me that the target is a benefit claiming strategy known as file-and-suspend - a twist on the more straightforward strategy of delayed filing to earn a higher monthly benefit down the road. Although it's technically available to anyone, the White House thinks the strategy is being used to unfair advantage by high-income seniors and wants to shut it down because of the added benefit cost it imposes on the Social Security program.

Any change to file-and-suspend would require congressional action, so don't expect anything soon. But words like "aggressive" and "manipulate" are unusually strong for a federal budget document, so let's look at what file-and-suspend is about - how it's used and whether it makes sense to target it for elimination.

Is this really about wealth or are the higher earners more likely to have a financial plan and think about what they are doing and thinking long term. Will the next step be to force everyone to take it by 66?
Also from the link

Too clever by half? Perhaps, but it's completely legal - approved by the United States Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton as part of a broader law called the Senior Citizens' Freedom to Work Act of 2000. The main point of the law was to give people incentives to work longer by allowing them to work and receive full Social Security benefits after they have reached their FRA.

The law's file-and-suspend provision allows married couples to start receiving some benefit to meet living expenses while they wait to get more later. It didn't get much attention until a few years ago, when the media started writing about it. A growing number of financial planners are recommending the strategy to clients. It's also getting better known through online services that help people maximize benefits.

[marcopolo]

Originally Posted by Teddy52

Blast the proposal all you want but it is high time for someone to have the guts to address the problem SS is /will be facing.

Every time SS is discussed I think of Nero fiddling while Rome was burning.

"File and suspend" is .00002% of the solution. Otherwise, the Democratic position on entitlement reform may be concisely summed up by the slogan, "Unsustainable benefits forever!"

[TuborgP]

Originally Posted by Heidi60

I really can't say who is using the tactic but, to me, it does favor those who can afford and it should be removed or subject to means testing.

Please share why? Wasn't it intended for those who wanted to continue working?

The main point of the law was to give people incentives to work longer by allowing them to work and receive full Social Security benefits after they have reached their FRA.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by marcopolo

"File and suspend" is .00002% of the solution. Otherwise, the Democratic position on entitlement reform may be concisely summed up by the slogan, "Unsustainable benefits forever!"

Or perhaps 1984 and class warfare levied by millionaires!