social security benefits

[DeeRae]

Okay - got the ruling from SS after filing for spousal benefits. Even though I'm 66 - my possible retirement benefits have to be less than 1/2 of my ex husbands - which they aren't. Oh well - so much for that. I'm not sure if I talked to someone else if they would have a different opinion, but this lady was very nice (the others I have talked to have not been) and said if he should die - then I would be eligible for 100%. So I'll just let it go. I thought it actually sounded too good to be true - and it was.

[TuborgP]

Originally Posted by miokie

If you apply before full retirement age, the problem kicks in if benefits from your earnings are greater than 50% of your spouse's. In that case, they start paying you your benefits, and you quit accumulating credits. So you're stuck with that reduced benefit for the rest of your life.

That might be OK with you but not everyone will want to go that route. Some folks would rather wait until both they and their spouse have reached full retirement age so they then can *choose* which arrangement works better for them.

Again, everyone needs to make sure they understand *exactly* how the SS spousal rules affect them.

There are a lot of clear concise articles about this and under what circumstances it works. As you say people need to know how it impacts THEM and their situation. You can't read a forum and get advice from people and THEIR situations. There is a clear model of it and don't let anyone tell you that doing it is wrong and what the law was intended for. If SS doesn't want it to happen they can change the ball game. Should we care about the wife who never worked and contributed a penny or the couple who both worked long and hard and made yearly contributions for a number of years. I am sure that working wife would have loved to sit at home but realized their retirement needs had to be considered.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/11/yo.../11retire.html
MARRIED COUPLES Planning is more complex for married couples because there are age differences, varying retirement dates and earnings and other factors to consider. In many cases, the higher-earning spouse should delay his or her benefits until age 70, while the lower earner begins to collect at age 62. This ensures that the surviving spouse will end up with the maximum amount of benefits for the rest of his or her life. Even if the higher earner died before age 70, the survivor’s benefits would be bumped up to what the deceased spouse would have gotten, said Lesley J. Brey, a fee-only financial planner in Honolulu.

[TuborgP]

Originally Posted by mathjak107

hmmm if this is true it will blow my plan out of the water. ill have to double check with ss directley when the time comes

There are any number of articles on this topic and one of the consistent points is that the SS reps are often behind on knowing what the answer to questions ought to be. You are talking about what was probably an unintended consequence of SS regulations. Fee only adivisors figured it out and it is now making its way into the mainstream. It is like tax law. You can pay or you can get professional advice and save. It is up to you. You can listen to professional advice or get it in a forum. Your retirement and you are obviously bright and already know what I am talking about. To each their own my friend. The biggest question is what changes will occur before it is our time to use the current regs.

[TuborgP]

Originally Posted by DeeRae

Okay - got the ruling from SS after filing for spousal benefits. Even though I'm 66 - my possible retirement benefits have to be less than 1/2 of my ex husbands - which they aren't. Oh well - so much for that. I'm not sure if I talked to someone else if they would have a different opinion, but this lady was very nice (the others I have talked to have not been) and said if he should die - then I would be eligible for 100%. So I'll just let it go. I thought it actually sounded too good to be true - and it was.

Depends what your goal is. You have a retirement goal and measure your options against that. Our goal is to maximize my wife's benefits in the event of my death. With that as a goal she takes hers at 62, I take spousal on hers at 66 and my full at 70. If I pass she can take 50% of mine at age 70 and will still have collected hers until that point. It maximizes her payout and also she still has what she started collecting at 62.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/11/yo.../11retire.html
Ms. Brey said. “You want the last survivor to have the highest possible payment. However, you get cash flow, which reduces the amount you have to withdraw from other sources and you don’t have to guess when anyone is going to die.”

But if the couple can afford it, should the lower earner wait until full retirement age? “It doesn’t matter because the goal is to get the most money for the person who lives thelongest,” Ms. Brey said.

Married people with similar earnings may also consider another strategy. Here, one person claims spousal benefits at full retirement age and switches to his or her own, and presumably higher, benefits later, said Alicia H. Munnell, director of the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.

It depends on your situation and personal GOALS.

[trezza54]

Hi, I'm new to the City-Data Forum but have read a number of posts from here. I'm applying for my ex spouse's ss benefit early next year. I'm 62 and was wondering if I can claim benefits on my own earnings when I'm 66 and if they will be reduced since I am claiming benefits at age 62. I read on another blog that I can collect my own AND my ex spouse's benefit at 62 with a yearly income cap. But then, I've read that you can only claim a benefit on one earning record. Can anyone help me figure this out. From other posts, I'm not too trusting of getting correct info from my local ss office. Thanks--trezza

[mathjak107]

I believe once you file early you are locked in to the lower rate. the choices of switching accounts while letting 1 still grow begins at full retirement only.

you never really give up yours for another, you always get your own if you file early...


i was going to have my wife file at 62 origionally . i was going to file for 1/2 hers and then at 66 or 70 file for mine.

i found out i cant , i could only take 1/2 hers at 66 and get credit for letting mine grow to 70 and then filing on my own account. if i file early i only get mine not 1/2 hers and that early rate stays forever... . that killed that idea.....

[TuborgP]

Originally Posted by mathjak107

I believe once you file early you are locked in to the lower rate. the choices of switching accounts while letting 1 still grow begins at full retirement only.

you never really give up yours for another, you always get your own if you file early...


i was going to have my wife file at 62 origionally . i was going to file for 1/2 hers and then at 66 or 70 file for mine.

i found out i cant , i could only take 1/2 hers at 66 and get credit for letting mine grow to 70 and then filing on my own account. if i file early i only get mine not 1/2 hers and that early rate stays forever... . that killed that idea.....

Yah you have to wait til your normal retirement age. However you can let yours grow to age 70 and she will have that to work with if you pass first.I believe it was the NY Times article who had a real good writeup on who that is best intended for and what goals. My understanding is that strategy is best for two earners with a goal to maximize SS for the surviving spouse.

[DeeRae]

If any of you have followed my previous posts, you'll know that I applied for divorced spousal benefits - I am age 66, so at full retirement age. I was denied because they said my own benefits would be higher. I was just going to let that go, but then out the clear, they started sending me a check - based on my own benefits, which I had told them I did not want - I am still working and didn't really need it so was going to let it accumulate for awhile. When I called SS to see how to return the check and not start receiving my benefits, I was pleasantly surprised. The person helping me was very nice - said I should not have been denied spousal benefits, because once I reached FRA, it was my decision to get spousal or my own - regardless of which is higher. He even checked with his supervisor and put it on my record. I am going to local SS Tuesday to return the check of my benefits, and get started on spousal benefits - I hope. In the meantime, this is an interesting article addressing exactly the same thing.

"I'm presently 65 and a half years old, and have been divorced for 30 years. I was married for more than 10 years and never remarried. I presently earn $60,000 a year and don't plan to fully retire for at least another year and a half. Social Security tells me I can't collect spousal benefits now because I make too much money, but after age 66 -- which is my full retirement age -- I can make as much as I want and collect spousal benefits. Is this correct? -- MA via email

A: Yes. Once you've reached FRA, you have much more flexibility.

You'll be able to a) apply solely for your spousal benefit, excluding your own benefit from the application, so that it continues to accrue credits; and b) collect your spousal benefit regardless of how much you earn.