social security benefits (pensions, relocate, retired, adult)

[marylee54]

Originally Posted by Tesaje

It's the other way around - 1/2 of the spouse or 100% of your own while the spouse lives. Either - or, never both. 100% of the spouse's at death if it is greater than her own.

Oops.................thanks for correcting the error! Guess I was thinking and typing in opposite directions, that's what you get when you're up too late!

[Paka]

Originally Posted by texasfirewheel

So, theoretically, 2 (or more) ex-wives who never paid into SS could draw the same SS amount for many years? Does that seem right???????????? If I were one of the ex-wives, I might think so -- but, as someone who's paid into SS for 35 years, I'm a bit miffed at that idea.

Don't forget to figure in the "10yrs or more married" requirement..something fewer and fewer folks do these days....

[Paka]

If I read a story in Money magazine correctly, I am one of the few that would be best served starting to draw on my earnings at age 62. I worked, can draw on my own earnings starting at age 62, but my hubby is 18 months younger and makes a lot more than me. I can switch over to drawing off of his after he retires at full entitlement, and stop collecting on my younger age at a partial entitlement rate. The reason it said this was smart is, banking that entitlement, if something were to happen to me between partial and full entitement age, I would have collected and banked the entitlement vs never having drawn waiting for the higher entitlement and dying before starting to collect.

Might not apply to everyone, but works for us.

[ljk14]

All you have to do is go to your SS office and they will give you all the info you need. But a person has to be married to their spouse for at least "10 YEARS" before being able to use their spouses SS, not 9 months as stated in one of the replies.

[Tesaje]

Originally Posted by ljk14

But a person has to be married to their spouse for at least "10 YEARS" before being able to use their spouses SS, not 9 months as stated in one of the replies.

Not true. A current spouse must be married 9 months by the time of death to get the spousal benefit. An ex-spouse (not currently married at time of death) must have been married for 10 years to the ex.

[lenora]

Originally Posted by Paka

If I read a story in Money magazine correctly, I am one of the few that would be best served starting to draw on my earnings at age 62. I worked, can draw on my own earnings starting at age 62, but my hubby is 18 months younger and makes a lot more than me. I can switch over to drawing off of his after he retires at full entitlement, and stop collecting on my younger age at a partial entitlement rate. The reason it said this was smart is, banking that entitlement, if something were to happen to me between partial and full entitement age, I would have collected and banked the entitlement vs never having drawn waiting for the higher entitlement and dying before starting to collect.

Might not apply to everyone, but works for us.

From what I can figure out, if you start drawing at age 62, your retirement benefits will be permanently reduced. Thus, if you "switch over" to hubby's account when he retires at full entitlement, you will receive the equivalent of 35% of his retirement amount, instead of 50% of the amount. However, when he dies, you will still be entitled to receive 100% in survivor's benefits.

[tigerwoodsyall]

Originally Posted by lenora

From what I can figure out, if you start drawing at age 62, your retirement benefits will be permanently reduced. Thus, if you "switch over" to hubby's account when he retires at full entitlement, you will receive the equivalent of 35% of his retirement amount, instead of 50% of the amount. However, when he dies, you will still be entitled to receive 100% in survivor's benefits.

I don't think that's the case, under your retirement you will be reduced but not under spousal benefits. I think survivor benefits are not 100% as you all are saying its 75% of his base amount (the amount used when calculating early retirement and full retirement, ie full retirement age)

[lenora]

Aaarrgghhh! I tried so hard to explain the overall impact of taking the reduced benefit and still managed to screw it up. You are correct in that the worker's benefit is permanently reduced but the spousal benefit is not. So, for example: Low earning spouse chooses to receive benefit at 62 on her own record. If she waited until retirement age, her full benefit would be $400. However, because she chose the early benefit, it is reduced to $300. Higher earning spouse waits to retire at full retirement age, drawing $2000. If spouse had waited to draw until full retirement age, she would be drawing $400 on her own account and $600 of spousal benefits equaling $1000/mth. (50 % of high earner amount.) However, since she took early benefits of $300/mth, this is added to the spousal amount of $600 and she ends up with $900/mth. Thus, her TOTAL benefit is permanently reduced. (Granted, if she has a decent amount on her own record, this is all probably irrelevant.)

I THINK if she waits to take the survivor benefits when she is of full retirement age, she is still able to take the full amount. BUT I haven't researched this yet. Maybe tomorrow.

[triciajeanne]

Don't feel too bad for being wrong - I spent some time in a social security office today, trying to find out just what was the 1/2 benefit that I could figure I would receive at retirement age. The agent for social security told me that she couldn't tell me the amount until i filed a claim. I don't believe that is true. I believe that I can find out what my ex-spouse's expected benefit is and thus mine. The agent also told me that I would get 1/2 but if the current wife files, we split the 1/2. When I said I believed that was erroneous, she asked me why I was in the office if I already knew the answers. DUH - i was in the office to find the projected amount of my ex-spouse's benefit. It was when she continued to give me incorrect information that I questioned her facts. At least if you're wrong, you don't work for Social Security. Someone explain to me how there are information agents working in the system that can't give the right answers. Guess that's why they post that it is a federal crime to kill, maim, abduct, etc any agent while they are working - after a little while in the office, you have a toss of the coin whether to shoot yourself or strangle them. tricia who was left with more questions than answers after meeting with the social security office in this little town.

Originally Posted by MadManofBethesda

My apologies to Tesaje. I guess I was still a little sleepy earlier this morning and missed the "if he dies" part of the statement. My answer applies to ex-spouses, not surviving ex-spouses.

Next time I'll splash some cold water on my face and drink more coffee before coming to the boards.

My apologies once again.

[texdav]

The way it was explained to mne if their is a married copue with two different account when one dies the other has the choice of taking the takig the higher benefit. The children however still eliable are not effected the same.