Ask Liz Weston

Get smart with your money

Q&A

Q&A: Spousal and survivor benefits operate by different rules

By 2 Comments

Dear Liz: I believe you provided bad information to the woman inquiring about Social Security spousal benefits for her husband.

You suggested to her that since she was the higher income spouse, that she wait until age 70 to maximize the benefit her husband could receive. I used to think that was the case as well, and was planning my Social Security start date accordingly.

However, a few months ago I found out that this is not true. The maximum spousal support is based on the full retirement age of the spouse or deceased spouse, not the maximum amount received if the deceased spouse waits longer to take Social Security. This is true for both spousal benefits when the higher wage earner is alive and for survivor benefits. After finding this information out, I filed to start receiving immediately, since I’m at my full retirement age.

Answer: Many people confuse the rules for spousal and survivor benefits, as you’ve done. This is why it can be so important to discuss your claiming strategy with an expert before you make a decision that stunts the survivor’s future income.

Spousal benefits are available when the higher earner is still alive. Spousal benefits can be up to 50% of the higher earner’s benefit at full retirement age. Spousal benefits don’t get bigger if the higher earner delays filing beyond his or her full retirement age, and they don’t shrink if the higher earner applies before full retirement age. (If the spouse applies before his or her own retirement age, however, the spousal benefit typically will be reduced because of the early start.)

Survivor benefits are a different story. These are the benefits that kick in once the higher earner has died. Survivor benefits are up to 100% of what the higher earner was actually receiving. In other words, survivor benefits can be stunted if the higher earner starts a retirement benefit early and will get bigger if the higher earner delays applying.

This is why financial advisors often recommend the higher earner wait to file until their benefit maxes out at age 70. Not only is the higher earner likely to maximize their lifetime benefit by waiting, but the delay also increases the checks the survivor will receive.

If you regret your decision to start benefits, you could opt to suspend your application. You wouldn’t get back the delayed retirement credits you lost after starting your benefit, but those credits would be applied going forward so your benefit amount could continue to grow.

Another option, if it’s been less than 12 months since you applied, is to withdraw your application. This would require paying back all the benefits you’ve received so far, but it would reset the clock so that you could earn all the delayed retirement credits you missed.

Q&A: Planning for retirement in a volatile market

By

Dear Liz: I have a retirement account at work and a stock portfolio. Both are down significantly this year and I’m tired of losing money. What are the safest options now?

Answer: Before the “what” you need to think about the “why” and the “when.” Why are you investing in the first place? And when will you need this money?

If you’re investing for retirement, you may not need the money for years or decades. Even when you’re retired, you’ll likely need to keep a portion of your money in stocks if you want to keep ahead of inflation. The price for that inflation-beating power is suffering through occasional downturns.

You won’t suffer those downturns in “safer” investments such as U.S. Treasuries or FDIC-insured savings accounts, but you also won’t achieve the growth you likely need to meet your retirement goals. In fact, you may be losing money after inflation and taxes are factored in.

Also keep in mind that if you sell during downturns, you’ve locked in your losses. Any money that’s not invested won’t be able to participate in the inevitable rebounds after downturns. Plus, you may be generating a tax bill, since a stock that’s down for the year may still be worth more than when you bought it. (You don’t have to worry about taxes with most retirement accounts until you withdraw the money, but selling stocks in other accounts can generate capital gains.)

The exception to all this is if you have money in stocks that you’re likely to need within five years. If that’s the case, the money should be moved to investments that preserve principal so the cash will be there when you need it.

Q&A: Should retired teacher return to work?

By

Dear Liz: I am a retired special education teacher who receives a government pension. The recent law change now permits me to also receive Social Security. I have 38 of the 40 credits required in order to qualify. Am I better off getting a job to earn those two credits? Another teacher explained to me that I can be paid 50% of my husband’s Social Security benefit instead. That would likely be greater than my own Social Security benefit. We would both wait until we are 70 to collect Social Security.

Answer: The Social Security Fairness Act did away with the windfall elimination provision and the government pension offset, two rules that reduced Social Security benefits for people receiving pensions from jobs that didn’t pay into Social Security.

As you’ve noted, to qualify for your own benefit you would need 40 quarterly credits or 10 years of work history at jobs that paid into Social Security. If your credits were earned decades ago at low-paying jobs, then your spousal benefit might well be larger than your own retirement benefit.

Your spousal benefit can be up to 50% of your husband’s benefit at his full retirement age. Spousal benefits are reduced if you start before your own full retirement age, which is presumably 67, but won’t be increased if you wait beyond that age. Your husband must be receiving his own benefit before you can get a spousal benefit.

The rules can be complex so you’ll want to educate yourself thoroughly and consider consulting a financial planner to figure out the best claiming strategy.

Q&A: Not everyone benefits from the Social Security Fairness Act

By

Dear Liz: My husband passed away in January 2024. He retired from the U.S. Postal Service after 37 years. He drew off of my Social Security since he did not pay in. How will the change in the windfall elimination provision affect me?

Answer: It may not.

Social Security has promised to increase benefits and make retroactive payments to people affected by the windfall elimination provision and the government pension offset. The retroactive payments reflect the increase in their payment amount dating back to January 2024, when the two provisions stopped applying. Social Security is mailing notices to people who will be affected, and most will see the benefit increases starting this month.

Technically, you weren’t affected by either provision, since they applied to people receiving pensions that didn’t pay into Social Security, not their spouses. Your husband’s Social Security spousal benefit likely was reduced because of the government pension offset.

Since your husband died the month that the two provisions stopped applying, the amount Social Security may owe him retroactively is likely small, if anything. If you don’t get a notice or see a payment, you can call Social Security to inquire, but the agency says most affected beneficiaries will get their adjustments automatically.

You can learn more about the Social Security Fairness Act here: https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement/social-security-fairness-act.html.

Q&A: Losing a home in a fire, then being hit with a ‘casualty gain’

By

Dear Liz: My house was burned down in the Palisades fire. I lived in the house for 25 years and lost everything. I thought there may be a silver lining with tax deductions. Much to my surprise, I am supposed to use the purchase price from 25 years ago as my adjusted cost basis. The insurance settlement is not going to be enough to rebuild but is more than my cost basis. I will end up with “casualty gain” instead. Is this possible?

Answer: After losing your home and finding out you were underinsured, the news that you might have a taxable gain must have been a gut punch.

The IRS calls it an “involuntary conversion” when your property is destroyed and you receive insurance proceeds. If the insurance payment exceeds your tax basis in the property, that’s known as a casualty gain.

You can defer tax on this gain if you use the insurance payout to rebuild or buy a replacement property, says Mark Luscombe, a principal analyst with Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting. Normally you’d have two years to use the insurance proceeds, but in a federally declared disaster such as the Los Angeles fires, the deadline is extended to four years.

The IRS may be willing to further extend the deadline under some circumstances, such as contractor delays, Luscombe says. But don’t count on an extension if you’re simply unable to find a replacement property.

If you do purchase a new home elsewhere, any gain from the sale of the lot where your previous home stood also would have to be reinvested in the new home to avoid a current tax on the gain, Luscombe says.

However, the home sale tax exclusion also applies to involuntary conversions. The exclusion allows you to shelter up to $250,000 of gains ($500,000 if married filing jointly) on a sale or involuntary conversion, as long as you’ve owned and lived in the property as your primary residence for two of the last five years. So you could exclude that amount of gain and defer the rest if you rebuild or find a replacement property, Luscombe says.

This is complicated territory, so please make sure you hire a tax pro to guide you.