Ask Liz Weston

Get smart with your money

Social Security

Q&A: Social Security and break-even math

By

Dear Liz: You recently wrote about the complexity of retiring with a government pension and Social Security. You left out one very important resource: the Social Security Administration. Going into a Social Security office and sitting with a representative who can explain exactly how much a person will get (almost impossible to determine online using formulas) was the most helpful thing I did. I retired with a government pension at 60 years of age, and at 63 I went to the SS office to chat. I learned that if I waited until full retirement age (67) my break-even point would be 18 years! I slept on the numbers, discussed that with a trusted advisor and filed to take my Social Security benefit. Couldn’t be happier. The employees in the local office were wonderful, knowledgeable about the windfall elimination provision and could give exact numbers.

Answer: It sounds like the representative you consulted encouraged you to make your decision using a simple break-even calculation. That’s unfortunate for a number of reasons.

Break-even calculations typically purport to show the point at which the larger checks you get from delaying your Social Security application outweigh the smaller checks you pass up in the meantime. But the calculators usually don’t include important factors, such as inflation, tax rates and the impact of your filing decision on survivor benefits. These calculators also don’t include pertinent information about life expectancies. According to Social Security actuarial tables, for example, 63-year-old females in the U.S. can expect to live an additional 21.24 years.

That’s average life expectancy, of course. The more educated you are and the more income you make, the more years you can probably add to that tally. And the longer you live, the more likely you are to run through your savings. Many people who are able to make ends meet in their 60s and 70s wind up struggling financially in their 80s because they started Social Security too soon, says actuary Steve Vernon, a former research scholar at the Stanford Center on Longevity.

Of course, you’ll be much less dependent on Social Security than most people, thanks to your pension. It’s possible your trusted advisor took that into consideration, along with your longevity profile, tax situation and other possible income sources, when suggesting you apply for a permanently reduced check. Most people can’t afford such reductions.

Q&A: Social Security and government pensions

By

Dear Liz: When is the “sweet spot” for me to start receiving Social Security benefits? I am retired and collecting two government pensions — mine and my ex-husband’s. I paid into Social Security for 26 years of substantial earnings when I was in the private sector. I do not want to return to work to get to 30 years of substantial earnings in order to avoid the windfall elimination provision reduction. I will reach full retirement age early next year and have a family history of longevity (my parents lived into their 90s). I am paying all of my bills currently but will do more traveling once I am collecting Social Security. Should I wait until 70 to collect? I think I need to live until about 84 to make waiting a good choice. I tried to get this answer from a financial planner at a free seminar and he would not tell me without hiring him for further consultations.

Answer: That’s not surprising. Social Security claiming strategies can be a complex topic, and your situation is more complex than most.

As you know, the windfall elimination provision can reduce Social Security benefits for people receiving pensions from government jobs that didn’t pay into Social Security. The provision doesn’t apply to people who have 30 or more years of “substantial earnings” from jobs that did pay into Social Security. (The amount considered substantial varies by year, but in 2023 it’s $29,700.) Your 26 years of substantial earnings will mitigate, but not eliminate, the provision’s effects.

Social Security has tools that can help you estimate the impact. Start by opening an account with Social Security, if you haven’t already, and getting your earnings record from those 26 years. You’ll then enter each year’s worth of “substantial earnings” into Social Security’s windfall elimination provision calculator to determine what your benefit is likely to be at various ages.

Next, consider using a paid Social Security claiming site, such as Maximize My Social Security or Social Security Solutions, to get recommendations on when to claim rather than using calculators that purport to show a “break even age” for delaying Social Security.

These calculators typically don’t include important factors such as tax rates, rates of return and, for married couples, future survivor benefits. They also don’t really address “longevity risk” — the substantial danger that the longer you live, the more likely you are to run through your savings and wind up short of money.

On the other hand, you have not one but two government pensions that will provide guaranteed income for the rest of your life. If your Social Security benefit is truly “fun money,” rather than the lifeline it serves as for most people, maximizing your benefit may not be your top priority. But get all the information you can about the cost and benefits of claiming at different ages before making your decision.

Q&A: Social Security is insurance

By

Dear Liz: My wife was 69 at the time of her passing. She was still working and not collecting Social Security. I am 72, retired and collecting Social Security. When I spoke with Social Security, I was told that I cannot collect on my wife’s Social Security. All I qualify for is a $255 death benefit. I asked what happened to her money that was collected all these years; I was told it goes into a general fund. Is there anything I can get from my wife’s Social Security?

Answer: If your current benefit is larger than the survivor benefit you would get based on her work record, then no.

Your question illustrates two common misconceptions about Social Security.

Social Security is not a 401(k) or other retirement fund that you pay into over time and then draw from in retirement. Social Security is actually insurance. (Social Security’s formal name is Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance, or OASDI.) It’s a pay-as-you-go system where the payroll taxes collected from current workers pay for the benefits received by people who are retired or disabled and their dependents.

The other misconception is that survivors are qualified for additional benefits on top of their own. In fact, survivors get the larger of the two benefits a couple was receiving — not both. This is, unfortunately, often a surprise to widows and widowers who see their incomes plunge after their partners die.

Q&A: Social Security survivor benefits

By

Dear Liz: My beloved brother died recently. He was 70, retired and collecting Social Security. His husband, age 63, is still working. They had been married since 2008 but when he applied for survivor benefits, he was denied. Several in our friend group looked into this and the way we all read it, he should be entitled to survivor benefits. What are we not understanding?

Answer: Your brother-in-law wasn’t denied a survivor benefit, precisely. He just earns too much to receive one.

If your brother-in-law was born in 1960, his full retirement age is 67. People who apply for Social Security benefits before their full retirement age are subject to the earnings test, which reduces their benefit by $1 for every $2 they earn over a certain limit, which in 2023 is $21,240.

The earnings test will go away once he turns 67. At that point — or earlier, if he reduces his work hours and earnings sufficiently — he will have a choice between starting a survivor benefit and starting his own, with the option to switch later. If he’s earned a sizable benefit on his own work record, for example, it could make sense to start the survivor benefit and allow his own benefit to grow until it maxes out at age 70. A claiming strategies site, such as Maximize My Social Security or Social Security Solutions, can help him choose the right course, or he could consult a fee-only financial planner.

Q&A: When WEP doesn’t apply

By

Dear Liz: I am a retired police officer who worked for an organization that did not pay into Social Security or Medicare. During my career I worked side jobs and paid my own self-employment taxes to get my 40 quarters to qualify for Medicare once I reach age 65. I did have Social Security earnings for about eight years prior to my law enforcement career. My understanding is any Social Security I would otherwise be entitled to will be wiped out by the windfall elimination provision. The WEP calculator on Social Security’s website isn’t user friendly so I can’t tell if I will lose all or a portion of my Social Security to WEP.

Answer: Your own Social Security benefit won’t be wiped out. The windfall elimination provision can reduce your Social Security retirement benefit by up to half when you get a pension from a job that didn’t pay into Social Security.

By contrast, another provision called the government pension offset (GPO) can and often does eliminate Social Security benefits, but only those based on someone else’s work record, such as spousal or survivor benefits.

Also, you misunderstood how Medicare works. You need to work 40 quarters to qualify for a Social Security retirement benefit, but you can qualify for Medicare at age 65 as a U.S. citizen regardless of your work history.

Q&A: Social Security cost of living adjustments

By

Dear Liz: I am 67 and am delaying taking my Social Security until age 70 to take advantage of the 8% annual deferral. I was told by an individual at the Social Security office that I won’t get any inflation adjustments, such as the 8.7% increase for this year, and that people only receive the inflation adjustments if they’re actually receiving Social Security. Is that correct?

Answer: No. The Social Security Administration makes that clear in its two-page document, “Your Retirement Benefit: How It’s Figured.” Here’s what that document says verbatim:

“You’re eligible for cost-of-living benefit increases starting with the year you turn age 62. This is true even if you don’t get benefits until your full retirement age or even age 70. We add cost-of-living increases to your benefits beginning with the year you reach 62. Benefits are adjusted yearly to reflect the increase, if any, in the cost-of-living as measured by the Consumer Price Index.”

Your experience unfortunately isn’t unique. Other readers have reported getting misinformation or bad advice from Social Security reps. Social Security is a complicated system with many nuances, so it’s important to get a second opinion from a knowledgeable source, such as a fee-only financial planner, before making decisions regarding your benefits.