Social Security (revisited)

[Midpack]

Here's a good, free Social Security calculator:
https://opensocialsecurity.com/

+1. A very good FREE resource IMO. Make sure you add the additional info if applicable.

 

[Chuckanut]

But the whole point of claiming at 70 (i.e., annuitizing) is cheap longevity insurance. That is insuring against the chance that you are the 50% that lives past 82/85, especially if you live long past. Or, even more importantly and likely for marrieds, that one of you does.

+1 Given that my dad hit almost 90 and my mother hit 92..... And both did that without the more intense attention to health that my generation seems obsessed about.

Also, in the event of LTC needs that go far beyond the normal time (which is under three years), the extra money would help out.

 

[Maidensong]

Start SS as soon as practicable for you. If leaving an inheritance is a consideration, your heirs, other than your wife) cannot inherit your SS unless she files for spousal benefits. So why not use SS now and save your other assets?

 

[MisterBill]

Just collect and let accumulate the $216,000, investing it until age 70.
$2250 a month at a conservative 4%, you would have over $250,000. At 7% you would have over $285,000. Then take the draw down on that for your life expectancy (84 years old or 14 more years at age 70) along with the original SS @ 62 of $2,250.
At 4%, that would be $2000 a month along with the $2250 for $4450. Much more attractive than the $3960, and at 7% savings rate, add another $700 a month to that for $5150 a month. Plus, if something should happen to you or to SS, you'd have a nest egg built up that is inheritable. SS is not.

You forgot about income tax you'll pay on the SS payments and possible earnings.

 

[MisterBill]

+1 Given that my dad hit almost 90 and my mother hit 92..... And both did that without the more intense attention to health that my generation seems obsessed about.

My father died a year ago just short of his 95th birthday and his mother almost made it to 100. I'm planning to wait until 70. My wife, who worked but whose SS benefit is less than her spousal benefit will be, will start collecting at FRA next spring since there is no benefit to waiting longer.

 

[2retireearly]

I would imagine taxes should be a consideration. 50% of SS is taxable. 100% of IRA (unless roth) and 401k are taxable. Play with the numbers knowing those 2 variables.

 

[RunningBum]

I would imagine taxes should be a consideration. 50% of SS is taxable. 100% of IRA (unless roth) and 401k are taxable. Play with the numbers knowing those 2 variables.

Up to 85% of SS is taxable.

 

[2retireearly]

Up to 85% of SS is taxable.

F

True, I was thinking of my elderly parents, who at the end were living only on Social Security:

For 2019 and 2020 tax years, single filers with a combined income of $25,000 to $34,000 must pay income taxes on up to 50% of their Social Security benefits. If your combined income was more than $34,000, you will pay taxes on up to 85% of your Social Security benefits.

 

[GenXguy]

Up to 85% of SS is taxable.

And as little as 0%.

 

[Out-to-Lunch]

Start SS as soon as practicable for you. If leaving an inheritance is a consideration, your heirs, other than your wife) cannot inherit your SS unless she files for spousal benefits. So why not use SS now and save your other assets?

Because you do not know how long you will live! You cannot know whether your heirs will be better off if you claim early or late until the will is being executed.

 

[RunningBum]

And as little as 0%.

Yep. Though OP was talking about trying to stay under $170K/yr so I suspect 85% applies.

 

[Vacation4us]

Can an ex spouse collect on the ex’s SS record even if remarried? Although I worked PT income was low for me except the last 10 years. Was married 18 years prior to new marriage. Pretty sure 50% of ex’s SS would be higher than 100% of mine. New DH gets no SS benefit.

 

[Dash man]

Can an ex spouse collect on the ex’s SS record even if remarried? Although I worked PT income was low for me except the last 10 years. Was married 18 years prior to new marriage. Pretty sure 50% of ex’s SS would be higher than 100% of mine. New DH gets no SS benefit.

No.

 

[CRLLS]

According to the SSA:

Surviving Divorced Spouse

If you are the divorced spouse of a worker who dies, you could get benefits the same as a widow or widower, provided that your marriage lasted 10 years or more.

Benefits paid to you as a surviving divorced spouse won't affect the benefit amount for other survivors getting benefits on the worker's record.

If you remarry after you reach age 60 (age 50 if disabled), the remarriage will not affect your eligibility for survivors benefits.

I think your situation is somewhat special in that your current spouse is not entitled to SS benefits. I cannot find info on that situation. It is definitely worth talking to the SSA.

 

[Chuckanut]

For 2019 and 2020 tax years, single filers with a combined income of $25,000 to $34,000 must pay income taxes on up to 50% of their Social Security benefits. If your combined income was more than $34,000, you will pay taxes on up to 85% of your Social Security benefits.

And those numbers are not adjusted for inflation.

 

[Perryinva]

One of the reasons I planned on waiting until age 70, was so that my EX could not file for 50% of mine until I filed. It was not an amicable divorce. She was older and very overweight so there was a chance she would never collect. Turns out she filed for her own at 62, and passed away from C at 63. I felt a little bad because she was entitled to a percentage of my pension (about $300/mo) when I turned 58, and turns out she did me a solid and never filed for it so the entire amount reverted back to me, which I wasn’t expecting. Now the plan is wait 5 more years, until 68, once SS is $40k, unless there Is some reason not to. DW is 68 & was collecting on her own since 62, higher than any spousal could be.

 

[RunningBum]

One of the reasons I planned on waiting until age 70, was so that my EX could not file for 50% of mine until I filed. It was not an amicable divorce. She was older and very overweight so there was a chance she would never collect. Turns out she filed for her own at 62, and passed away from C at 63. I felt a little bad because she was entitled to a percentage of my pension (about $300/mo) when I turned 58, and turns out she dis me a solid and never filed for it so the entire amount reverted back to me, which I wasn’t expecting. Now the plan is wait 5 more years, until 68, once SS is $40k, unless there Is some reason not to. DW is 68 & was collecting on her own since 62, higher than any spousal could be.

I've been known to be wrong on social security spouse/ex-spouse issues, but I'm pretty certain she would have gotten half the value of your benefit, not half of your actual benefit. Your benefit is not affected.

 

[Perryinva]

Yes, that is entirely correct. But for reasons not relevant here, I strongly felt that she did nothing to deserve getting that freebie. In fact, her lawyer kept using delay tactics for almost 2 years, which cost me quite a bit, to stretch the actual divorce date to legally make the marriage 10 years and one month, so she would get the spousal when the time came. Karma’s a beeyatch. DW, who worked her whole life, often struggling as a single mom, barely exceeded 1/2 of my max. Yet the EX, for doing less than nothing would have been able to waltz right in to that income. And that doesn’t even account for the fact had I died first & she lived, she was entitled to the same 100% of my SS as DW., the vast majority of which was earned after the divorce.

I don’t see how it is fair (on a cosmic level, not legally) that being young & stupid and married for barely ten years at age 30, then divorcing, entitled her to collect mostly on my hard work over the next 32 years!? She was long gone, and only provided headaches and financial hardship before, during and for a while after the divorce , yet she was entitled to the same as the current spouse of 25 years? Nuh-uh.

 

[RunningBum]

OK. Also, as discussed earlier, she did not need for you to start collecting before she could collect based on the value of your SS record.

 

[ivinsfan]

Yes, that is entirely correct. But for reasons not relevant here, I strongly felt that she did nothing to deserve getting that freebie. In fact, her lawyer kept using delay tactics for almost 2 years, which cost me quite a bit, to stretch the actual divorce date to legally make the marriage 10 years and one month, so she would get the spousal when the time came. Karma’s a beeyatch. DW, who worked her whole life, often struggling as a single mom, barely exceeded 1/2 of my max. Yet the EX, for doing less than nothing would have been able to waltz right in to that income. And that doesn’t even account for the fact had I died first & she lived, she was entitled to the same 100% of my SS as DW., the vast majority of which was earned after the divorce.

I don’t see how it is fair (on a cosmic level, not legally) that being young & stupid and married for barely ten years at age 30, then divorcing, entitled her to collect mostly on my hard work over the next 32 years!? She was long gone, and only provided headaches and financial hardship before, during and for a while after the divorce , yet she was entitled to the same as the current spouse of 25 years? Nuh-uh.

Apparently this all happened a long time ago and the lady has died. Since none of this would have taken one penny from your current wife, maybe you could move on...spousal benefits protect everyone, worthy or not worthy..

 

[curtc]

A quick question/consideration...does the surviving spouse receive the survivor benefit of the other waiting till 70 (assuming they are collecting )or just the spouse's amount they would have received at FRA retirement age. (assuming it is the higher amount) Thanks..
.it seems implied with the discussion that it would be the FRA plus increases of waiting and collecting at 70 for the deceased spouse....which would be more?
Just a clarification.....

 

[Telly]

The surviving spouse receives a survivors benefit which is 100% of what the deceased was getting at the time of death. I think in actuality, the $ first come from the surviving spouse's own account, then enough taken from the deceased's account to make up the total survivor benefit every month. Which is a don't care to the end-user, as $ are $. Of course, there may be limitations on what the surviving spouse gets due to GPO, if the surviving spouse has a governmental pension of their own that they were receiving $ from.

 

[RetireBy90]

Yes, that is entirely correct. But for reasons not relevant here, I strongly felt that she did nothing to deserve getting that freebie. In fact, her lawyer kept using delay tactics for almost 2 years, which cost me quite a bit, to stretch the actual divorce date to legally make the marriage 10 years and one month, so she would get the spousal when the time came. Karma’s a beeyatch. DW, who worked her whole life, often struggling as a single mom, barely exceeded 1/2 of my max. Yet the EX, for doing less than nothing would have been able to waltz right in to that income. And that doesn’t even account for the fact had I died first & she lived, she was entitled to the same 100% of my SS as DW., the vast majority of which was earned after the divorce.

I don’t see how it is fair (on a cosmic level, not legally) that being young & stupid and married for barely ten years at age 30, then divorcing, entitled her to collect mostly on my hard work over the next 32 years!? She was long gone, and only provided headaches and financial hardship before, during and for a while after the divorce , yet she was entitled to the same as the current spouse of 25 years? Nuh-uh.

I must agree with you that there are fairness issues with SS and the 10 year EX rule in the case you describe. Why she should get benefits based on earnings after the divorce is hard to understand. SS has been expanded quite a bit since first put in place and the expansion of benefits has put the original recipients benefits at risk. As the country moved to a point where over 50% of marriages end in divorce there were spouses (mostly women) that went into retirement without any SS support and you could argue deserved some support. However, as is often the case broad rules that attempt to deal with a issue also have unintended impacts elsewhere.

While I agree with your points I also think that 1) Any SS your EX would have been able to draw would not have had any impact on your benefits you worked to earn and 2) Life is too short to carry this with you any longer. Focus on the joys of being with your DW.

 

[orchid55]

When you dig down into the details the laws are strange. My father was married five times and three of those wives were entitled to collect on his record.

 

[Midpack]

When you dig down into the details the laws are strange. My father was married five times and three of those wives were entitled to collect on his record.

He was married to three wives for more than 10 years and none of them remarried (well)? If so, that’s uncommon.