SS Wants Me to Change My Spousal Election

[CRLLS]

With the currently active thread Clear Article About When To Take Social Security going strong, I thought I'd keep this separate.

I am one of the lucky ones who can delay filing until age 70 to file while receiving spousal benefits on DW's earnings. I received a letter this week from the SSA regarding my benefits. The letter starts out by saying "You get monthly benefits as a spouse. If you apply for retirement benefits on your own social security number, our records show that you may get higher benefits."

Then in big, bold, official looking letters "What You Need To Do You must apply before we can pay you the higher benefit...." and it goes on. It does not clearly say this is optional.

Could it be that the SSA realizes my greater overall benefits and wants to trick me into changing my application to reduce their costs?

I wonder how many really fall for this type of ploy? Not me. And I suspect that none of us here would either. I'm pretty sure that some will think they must follow what they "Need To Do."

 

[REWahoo]

I doubt this is a "trick" by the folks who administer SS. Reality says the vast majority of folks receiving SS need every penny they can get their hands on and this is simply a way of informing them they can increase their benefit now.

 

[Bigdawg]

I doubt this is a "trick" by the folks who administer SS. Reality says the vast majority of folks receiving SS need every penny they can get their hands on and this is simply a way of informing them they can increase their benefit now.

+1

 

[braumeister]

REWahoo is exactly right. It's completely optional; you don't have to do anything. They send those out every year to people who could (if they wanted to) receive more than they are currently getting.

 

[greengo523]

If it doesn't clearly say that it is optional, then it is a trick. Just a long standing trick.

 

[tulak]

You might also end up getting more from SS by taking the higher payment now. You never know.

 

[CRLLS]

I get it guys. Really I do. I know it is optional. Their was no mention about this being optional or elective.

My point is that the words they used and the formatting they chose could have been less instructive and more informative. It said you "What You Need To Do" in bold, capitalized letters. They are communicating with "retirees", not all of whom are 100% savvy. I find that intentionally misleading.

 

[gerntz]

The entire words. ""What You Need To Do You must apply before we can pay you the higher benefit...." and it goes on. It does not clearly say this is optional.", clearly (to me) says that you must apply to receive the higher benefit. Net, don't apply if you don't want the higher benefit. What's so hard about that? Does it tell you you'll be imprisoned or fined if you don't apply? If not, then it's clearly optional.

 

[Silver]

My DH is waiting until 70 to claim his SS, and is currently receiving a spousal benefit based on my SS. He got the same letter last week.

We interpreted it as an "encouragement" to claim his full benefits now rather than wait while getting spousal benefits, and decided it may be an attempt at cost savings by the SS office. We are not changing anything.

 

[ivinsfan]

I get it guys. Really I do. I know it is optional. Their was no mention about this being optional or elective.

My point is that the words they used and the formatting they chose could have been less instructive and more informative. It said you "What You Need To Do" in bold, capitalized letters. They are communicating with "retirees", not all of whom are 100% savvy. I find that intentionally misleading.

I find when I call SS or go in for an appointment they are very clear about explaining all your options, at least in our office.

 

[Chuckanut]

We interpreted it as an "encouragement" to claim his full benefits now rather than wait while getting spousal benefits, and decided it may be an attempt at cost savings by the SS office. We are not changing anything.

+1

I get the same letter. I think in part it is a reminder that we can get more now if we need it. It also, I would think, helps the SS Trust Fund out, though I can't imagine it amounts to more than a hill of beans compared to the total payout each year. I doubt if it is some perfidious plot to cheat us out of our hard earned SS benefits.
I could be wrong.

 

[REWahoo]

... I can't imagine it amounts to more than a hill of beans compared to the total payout each year.

Yep. SS pays out over $1,000,000,000,000 annually and any potential savings to the fund would be infinitesimal.

 

[MichaelB]

There are so many annuity retirement options, they all cannot be communicated in a way that is simple and easy to figure out or even understand. I suspect there is always an influential voice somewhere challenging the SSA to clarify one option over another. This is never ending, because there are too many options.

 

[donheff]

Nobody at SS is conspiring to rip off retirees. They are just trying to help. If you found the letter misleading write back and tell them. Maybe suggest that add a sentence to the effect that you don’t need to do anything if you are intentionally waiting to file for your own benefit to increase the amount.

 

[athena53]

Interesting; I'm collecting Survivor benefits on late DH's record and waiting for my own to grow till I collect at age 70. I could definitely get a higher benefit on my own record now but, as with the OP, it's a deliberate decision to wait. I haven't gotten a similar letter.

I doubt if there's anything nefarious behind it. a lot of people just don't understand the ins and outs of SS so it might help someone who needs the extra income now.

 

[joeea]

Could it be that the SSA realizes my greater overall benefits and wants to trick me into changing my application to reduce their costs?

No.

I wonder how many really fall for this type of ploy? Not me. And I suspect that none of us here would either. I'm pretty sure that some will think they must follow what they "Need To Do."

It's not a ploy, any more than offering you the option to start your benefits at 62 is a ploy.

 

[joeea]

If it doesn't clearly say that it is optional, then it is a trick. Just a long standing trick.

Just because it isn't clear to you, that doesn't make it a trick.

 

[joeea]

I get it guys. Really I do. I know it is optional. Their was no mention about this being optional or elective.

My point is that the words they used and the formatting they chose could have been less instructive and more informative. It said you "What You Need To Do" in bold, capitalized letters. They are communicating with "retirees", not all of whom are 100% savvy. I find that intentionally misleading.

It may not be worded the way you'd prefer, but it isn't intentionally misleading.

I don't like the fact that they use the term Full Retirement Age when delaying to 70 would get you a "fuller" benefit. But they aren't being intentionally misleading.

 

[statsman]

I thought the ability to take SS off your spouse's benefit then switch to your own benefit was eliminated. Or maybe that was something else?

 

[MissMolly]

I thought the ability to take SS off your spouse's benefit then switch to your own benefit was eliminated. Or maybe that was something else?

If born on or before 01/01/1954 it is still an option. If born after then no longer an option. You might be thinking of "File and Suspend" which has been eliminated.

 

[Bestwifeever]

Interesting; I'm collecting Survivor benefits on late DH's record and waiting for my own to grow till I collect at age 70. I could definitely get a higher benefit on my own record now but, as with the OP, it's a deliberate decision to wait. I haven't gotten a similar letter....

Maybe because you’re currently receiving survivor’s vs spousal?

Like the OP I am getting spousal benefits, being of the grandfathered age to swap out of them for my own record; I have not received any communication from SS about switching to my own for more $$. In 16 more months I’ll switch at 70, for maybe $300 more a month.

 

[statsman]

If born on or before 01/01/1954 it is still an option. If born after then no longer an option. You might be thinking of "File and Suspend" which has been eliminated.

Oh, okay. I'm only 60 (DW is 66 and collecting benefits since 65), so I think that rules that option out for me. Unless the part about "born on or before 01/01/1954" applies to my DW.

 

[MissMolly]

Oh, okay. I'm only 60 (DW is 66 and collecting benefits since 65), so I think that rules that option out for me. Unless the part about "born on or before 01/01/1954" applies to my DW.

Well, technically she falls into the age bracket that would allow her to do this, but YOU would have to be drawing SS for her to file for spousal. Since you are still at least 2 years away from doing that then no, she cannot at this time. If you file for yours at age 62 you are forever locked into that lower amount. And her spousal amount would be 50% of your PIA, so she may already be collecting more than that anyway. There are a lot of pieces to the SS puzzle to consider before filing.

 

[beowulf]

I don't know if it's a trick or not, but my wife took the spousal benefit for 4 years until she turned 70 and we never received a letter like this. This would have been from 2014 to 2018. Also never heard of such a letter from friends who were doing the same thing. Could be a change in policy since the rules on spousal claiming were changed a few years ago.

 

[CRLLS]

OP here. Maybe it isn't a trick or ploy. Thanks for all the replies. Most seem to think it is just a friendly SS reminder. A couple agree there just might be something behind the scenes controlling the wording.

I might be paranoid. But even if I am, it doesn't mean they aren't out to get me.