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.
^ I wasn't aware of that Clemencia53. I have many friends here in TX that are teachers.
I am a career Federal employee - bought back my military time so Jan 17, 1984- Present. If I had joined the USAF in December instead of January - I could have chosen to be CSRS Civil Service Retirement System once I became Civil Service in 1992 - instead I have always been FERS Federal Employee Retirement System. I have put into SS since Jan 17, 1984 - and SS is 1/3 of my planned retirement funding.
When you say CA mandates a 50-50 split, can that be changed if both parties involved agree to a different division of property? In other words, if the party entitled to half of their spouses pension agreed to only receive 25% could they do that? (obviously that wasn't what happened in the case you've mentioned.)
Yes, it can be changed.
It would require either a prenuptial or postnuptial agreement to do so.
You could also do that using a separation agreement.
There are four basic agreements: cohabitation agreement, prenuptial agreement, postnuptial agreement and separation agreement.
You can pretty much agree to anything you want, so long as it doesn't address child support or violate "public policy."
In all four agreements, you can address child custody and visitation rights, but not child support payments, unless your child support agreement is in excess of what a court would mandate for payments.
You can agree to anything you want for property division and spousal support, so long as you don't violate "public policy" and under public policy you cannot leave your spouse destitute.
Generally, you'll have to provide sufficient spousal support that would allow your soon-to-be-ex-spouse to maintain a household (and not live on the streets).
Why prenuptials? Your family may be one of the first who settled in the county, you have land that's been in your family for generations and you want to keep that land in your family and not let a spouse get their hands on it through divorce. Same with a family-owned business. You may also have children from a previous marriage(s) and you want to protect their financial and property interests. You may want to protect inheritances in general. What you inherit through your family is yours, and what your spouse inherits through their family is theirs.
Same with postnuptial agreements. An older couple has 3 adult married children and a family-owned business. They told their children if you want a share in the family business, your spouses have to sign off on this postnuptial agreement waving any right, title, claim or interest in the business or proceeds from it.
The daughter-in-law they love happily signed off, and the son-in-law they hate grudgingly did but the gold-digging-wench-from-Hell who is their other daughter-in-law refused (so that son gets nothing).
You can do a postnuptial if you think you're heading toward divorce or do a full-blown separation agreement.
Just like a prenuptial, you can take your postnuptial or separation agreement before the judge or magistrate and ask it to be the final divorce decree. So long as it's equitable and doesn't violate public policy they will.
You should videotape the signing of any pre- or postnuptial or separation agreement and make absolutely sure they have every opportunity to seek independent legal counsel and that there's sufficient time, meaning they have at least four weeks to mull over the agreement before signing it, because if there's even the slightest appearance of coercion, force or duress, no judge will enforce it.
I work for the Federal Government and a nursing colleague of mine who is age 78 and has worked for the Feds now for 57 years has been collecting her husband's entire Social Security Survivor's benefit since he passed around 8 years ago. Despite her being under the CSRS retirement system she was able to at the time of her husband's death collect a full widow's SS survivor benefit because she was over her SS widow's FRA age and was working at the time of his death and is still working and has not yet starting collecting her CSRS pension. She told me once she finally does retires and begins to collect her CSRS pension her SS widow's survivor benefit will go away as a result of the GPO offset.
I thought that was wierd when she was barred from participating in SS. My roommate was a federal employee for over 30 and still gets SS and so did my dad. So will I.
Now my dad and the roommate had their SS through other jobs they held other than civil service. And when they were in the military - they double your quarters for certain periods.
Prior to 1984, federal employees under CSRS did not pay in to SS and had WEP (windfall elimination provision) that reduced the SS benefits they may have earned outside of the Government. They get much higher pensions as compensation.
The Military pays into SS and has since right after WW2 and Korea. I don't know about double counting but there was a small increase in benefits that helped some, but that ended about 20 years ago.
We have close friends both teachers in different jurisdictions. One paid into SS and the other didn't. They each had pensions.
When he passed the pension did also because he had not taken spousal benefits and the SS check stopped soon after that. Ouch!
While you can't claim your spouses SS as part of the divorce, you can always claim their social security when you file (married 10+).
My Mom filed on her ex-husbands SS and they have been divorced like 30 years. It doesn't affect the amount he get for SS.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
Federal law renders Social Security exempt from property division such as in a divorce. Your Social Security is separate property.
If an ex-spouse files for 1/2 the other spouse's retirement or disability benefit, that's a separate matter not having to do with the division of property. But your Social Security payment is all yours.
I read a very interesting case having to do with this. A top earner was paying into Social Security. His wife, a government employee, had a pension. (She was barred from participating in SS or receiving benefits as the spouse of an SS participant.) When they divorced, he was entitled to a share of his wife's pension but his Social Security benefit was his and his alone.
The wife appealed the decision but an appellate court upheld it, noting that their state (California) could change the law to create a more equitable outcome such as other states had done in this situation.
There must be some other reason this woman didn't participate or receive SS than being the spouse of an SS recipient. Perhaps she had worked within the old ( pre 1984, I think it was) retirement system in which the employee paid ( about 7% of their pay) into that system in lieu of SS, and had never held another job where she paid into SS. Or if she paid into the CA state pension as an employee there, in lieu of SS, she'd also not be eligible for SS/
In this case she wouldn't be eligible for SS as she had never contributed to the SS system, and I'd guess that would also make her ineligible for any benefits from her husband's SS at his death or a divorce.
I say this because my husband was a federal employee under the old federal retirement plan, so he collects that pension. But he also worked at other jobs where he paid into SS, and he collects SS now. The amount of SS he gets is reduced due to the Windfall provision
I worked for 46 yrs ( and counting, at age 72 I still work part time as a consultant now, so still pay into SS and Medicare at a contractor's rate) under SS so I collect SS. This doesn't prevent my husband from collecting at least some of the SS he earned from his non-federal employment, though I assume he'd not be eligible to collect any of my SS should I die before he does. Don't think it'd ever occur to him to even consider such a thing.
While you can't claim your spouses SS as part of the divorce, you can always claim their social security when you file (married 10+).
But you're not taking your spouse's Social Security.
If your spouse gets $2,100/month and you file a claim, your spouse still gets $2,100/month. Your spouse's benefit isn't reduced to pay your benefit.
The issue here is that one spouse (Annette) paid into a parallel quasi-Social Security system, which some States, counties, municipalities and school districts have.
The Social Security Administration has rules that bar "double-dipping" so that if you participated in one of those programs you may not be eligible for benefits in your own name or that of your spouse.
What does SSA say? They say if you have an SSA account in your name, and your benefit would be higher in your name than the benefit received filing in your spouse's name, then by law your are required to take the benefit in your name.
I think that's what's happening here. Annette has a CALPERS benefit in her name that would be greater in amount than the claim against her husband's benefit, so she is not entitled to her husband's benefit.
And then the court also said that neither a Social Security account nor a Social Security benefit are marital property.
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.
