Survivor's Benefits & Disability Benefits

[lenora]

Originally Posted by arwenmark

Based on what reasoning?

1) Strategically speaking, I believe some decision makers are biased against the claimant who also files for early retirement.

2) As noted in the prior posts, there are situations where the disabled worker could elect to receive delayed credits on her own earnings record until age 70 while simultaneously drawing a spousal benefit equal to 1/2 of her spouse's PIA (primary insurance amount).

Under the "new" interpretation, a disabled worker can no longer choose the spousal benefit WHILE earning delayed credits on her own record IF she was on the disability rolls one month before she reaches FRA.

Thus, if one is on the disability roll and intends to earn delayed credits while drawing a spousal benefit, she'd best get off the roll at least two months before she reaches FRA. This may be easier said than done.

Even disabled or fully retired, if hubby dies, she should still draw the full Survivor's benefit.

All of this applies to ex-spouses, as well.

[HollyhockGarden]

Re: The discussion about withdrawing from SSDI benefits before age 65 if you can collect higher benefits off of an ex or deceased husband: Why on earth would someone who is disabled and has high medical expenses want to withdraw from SSDI and the very important Medicare benefits, which can save the pre-65 year-old tons of dollars in health insurance and medical expenses? Especially after already going through the 24+ month "waiting" period? Do these folks always have an alternative source of health insurance? I don't see how it would make sense, otherwise!

Also, maybe you all can help me with this question. If a younger person "retires" at a pre-65/66 age and pays no more into Social Security because they are no longer working, does the amount in their account just keep rising in value as long as they keep their money in the Social Security fund? So that if they choose not to retire until 66 or 70, but have not been paying into their account through payroll taxes, the amount they will receive goes up anyway? I know it won't go up as much as the projections made under the assumption that the worker stays at the same wage until retirement, but will it at least go up some, because you let them have the use of your money? This is similar to Germaine's question, above.

[lenora]

Originally Posted by RVcook

And to expand, filing for both benefits prior to FRA will result in permanently reduced benefits with no other options as I mentioned in my previous post.

RVcook

It depends. The disabled claimant's earnings are "frozen" and his benefit will be equal to what he would have received had he continued to work until reaching FRA. However, if the worker had multiple years with zero earnings before becoming disabled, the disability check will be lower than what he would have received had he had the opportunity to make up for those zero years. For the nondisabled, SSA uses the average of the claimant's highest 35 years of earnings.

Also, the penalty for taking retirement benefits preFRA does not carry over to Survivor Benefits. If the widow/er waits until s/he is full retirement age to claim the survivor benefit, s/he will still receive the equivalent of 100% of the deceased's retirement check.

The only option rescinded by this new interpretation is the opportunity to file a restricted application for spousal benefits in order to allow the previously disabled claimant to accrue delayed retirement credits.

[RVcook]

Originally Posted by HollyhockGarden

Re: The discussion about withdrawing from SSDI benefits before age 65 if you can collect higher benefits off of an ex or deceased husband: Why on earth would someone who is disabled and has high medical expenses want to withdraw from SSDI and the very important Medicare benefits, which can save the pre-65 year-old tons of dollars in health insurance and medical expenses? Especially after already going through the 24+ month "waiting" period? Do these folks always have an alternative source of health insurance? I don't see how it would make sense, otherwise!

Also, maybe you all can help me with this question. If a younger person "retires" at a pre-65/66 age and pays no more into Social Security because they are no longer working, does the amount in their account just keep rising in value as long as they keep their money in the Social Security fund? So that if they choose not to retire until 66 or 70, but have not been paying into their account through payroll taxes, the amount they will receive goes up anyway? I know it won't go up as much as the projections made under the assumption that the worker stays at the same wage until retirement, but will it at least go up some, because you let them have the use of your money? This is similar to Germaine's question, above.

I have no idea why someone would knowingly 'want' to withdraw their claim, just that if they did, the loophole to do so has been closed.

The answer to the second part of your question is yes. As an example: I have enough credits to claim my own SS when I reach 62, 66 or 70. But I retired in my 50's. (Actually, I stopped working in my 40's, but officially retired in my 50's). As a result, my benefits are woefully small, but at least I can still claim them. And if I wait to claim them, they will continue to grow until I actually take them. Every year, I ask for my SS benefit statement to check and the amounts are individually stated for my full retirement age (FRA) at 66, also are stated (reduced) for age 62 and stated (increased) for benefits beginning at age 70. BTW...the difference between the amount I would receive at age is 62 is 57% less than the amount I would receive at age 70.

Originally Posted by lenora

It depends. The disabled claimant's earnings are "frozen" and his benefit will be equal to what he would have received had he continued to work until reaching FRA.

From the SSA website: When you are awarded SSDI benefits, those benefits are based on your average income over the number of years worked Disability Planner: You're Approved

Originally Posted by lenora

However, if the worker had multiple years with zero earnings before becoming disabled, the disability check will be lower than what he would have received had he had the opportunity to make up for those zero years. For the nondisabled, SSA uses the average of the claimant's highest 35 years of earnings.

Their 'formula' appears to be more complex than you state. From the SSDI website: We base Social Security benefits on your lifetime earnings. We adjust or “index” your actual earnings to account for changes in average wages since the year the earnings were received. Then Social Security calculates your average indexed monthly earnings during the 35 years in which you earned the most. We apply a formula to these earnings and arrive at your basic benefit, or “primary insurance amount.” This is how much you would receive at your full retirement age—65 or older, depending on your date of birth.

Originally Posted by lenora

Also, the penalty for taking retirement benefits preFRA does not carry over to Survivor Benefits. If the widow/er waits until s/he is full retirement age to claim the survivor benefit, s/he will still receive the equivalent of 100% of the deceased's retirement check.

The only option rescinded by this new interpretation is the opportunity to file a restricted application for spousal benefits in order to allow the previously disabled claimant to accrue delayed retirement credits.

Absolutely 100% correct

RVcook