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.
That IS very interesting. My wife is 65, and started collecting at 62. She earned enough that hers is a fair amount, about $1180/mo for 2018. She is still on my health insurance, sononly filed for Part A, so she gets her whole COLA, but as mentioned, she will be affected by the premium increases once I do retire. My own SS will always be the max for that age, but even then, based on her collecting at 62, 1/2 my PIA, reduced by her collecting early, still was less than her own benefit. If her spousal adder will always be an unreduced 1/2, that would make a fair difference. I wil be curious to see if after the new year your wife’s check is corrected.
I do find it interesting that so many people, after so many “when to collect SS threads” STILL CAN NOT understand that the real ability to be able to afford delaying SS while living off existing funds, means that they will have the ability to spend MORE from day one because of the reduction in sequence of market risk and that it has nothing to do with breaking even or getting the most from the government! The only downside to delaying is the reduction in inherited assets to heirs until that amount is (if I live long enough) recouped. Personally, if delaying costs me $200k, and I will have more disposable income from day one, then I don’t give a rats a$$ about that amount not passing on to my heirs. I earned it, I saved it, I want it to work for me and DW, not for them! If DW survives me, she will have more income and will live better with that than trying to handle investments. If she dies before me, then I am the beneficiary.
So why just not say, “we feel we will have insufficient funds to effectively delay filing” or “couple with our preference to leave as much as possible to our heirs” not “ We wanted more money to spend when we were younger, so we filed early”. EVERYONE would file early if that allowed everyone to have more net income early and no worry about enough later on!! That point of logic is so obvious, I just don’t understand how so many people constantly make that mistake.
Last edited by Perryinva; 12-29-2017 at 07:34 AM..
Question: My OH receives quite a large SS check. I get an average check. He is a few years older than me. If he died before me, what percentage of his check would I receive? Obviously, I know I would not get two checks, just a bigger check. I can’t find this info on line for some reason, and am just curious, since reading this thread.
it all depends on the age your husband filed for ss , the age you filed for retirement ss ,if you filed for it , and your age when you take survivor
then it depends on the amounts of your regular checks .
it can get complex if you didn't file yet , let your check grow to 70 while taking survivor until 70. but it depends on check amounts too because survivor may be more . but survivor is age based and whether pre fra , fra or after fra for all parties .
That IS very interesting. My wife is 65, and started collecting at 62. She earned enough that hers is a fair amount, about $1180/mo for 2018. She is still on my health insurance, sononly filed for Part A, so she gets her whole COLA, but as mentioned, she will be affected by the premium increases once I do retire. My own SS will always be the max for that age, but even then, based on her collecting at 62, 1/2 my PIA, reduced by her collecting early, still was less than her own benefit. If her spousal adder will always be an unreduced 1/2, that would make a fair difference. I wil be curious to see if after the new year your wife’s check is corrected.
I do find it interesting that so many people, after so many “when to collect SS threads” STILL CAN NOT understand that the real ability to be able to afford delaying SS while living off existing funds, means that they will have the ability to spend MORE from day one because of the reduction in sequence of market risk and that it has nothing to do with breaking even or getting the most from the government! The only downside to delaying is the reduction in inherited assets to heirs until that amount is (if I live long enough) recouped. Personally, if delaying costs me $200k, and I will have more disposable income from day one, then I don’t give a rats a$$ about that amount not passing on to my heirs. I earned it, I saved it, I want it to work for me and DW, not for them! If DW survives me, she will have more income and will live better with that than trying to handle investments. If she dies before me, then I am the beneficiary.
So why just not say, “we feel we will have insufficient funds to effectively delay filing” or “couple with our preference to leave as much as possible to our heirs” not “ We wanted more money to spend when we were younger, so we filed early”. EVERYONE would file early if that allowed everyone to have more net income early and no worry about enough later on!! That point of logic is so obvious, I just don’t understand how so many people constantly make that mistake.
spousal is dependent on both your ages and also as to when you both file . there is a double cut if you file pre fra and she files prefra .
it is different if you file fra and she files pre fra as well as it is different if you both are fra .
if we are talking survivor , under your fra you would get approx 82% of his benefit . if you waited until fra you would get his full benefit . your check dies off once you take survivor ..
if we are talking survivor , under your fra you would get approx 82% of his benefit . if you waited until fra you would get his full benefit . your check dies off once you take survivor ..
He means if your OH died you would get the 82% of his larger check, instead of yours, but you would also have to file as single, so higher taxes. But then presumably your expenses would also be less for one instead of two. That is another net incme benefit of reducing RMDs by drawing off tIRA for a larger SS check and rolling tIRA in to Roths. Paying more taxes on a lower income after suffering a loss is the last thing anyone needs.
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.
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.
