Social Security

Q&A: Confusion over spousal benefits

August 19, 2019 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: I am currently receiving a spousal benefit from Social Security that’s equal to 50% of my husband’s benefit. My husband and I applied when we were 66 years old in 2015. I do not think my own benefit will be higher than the spousal benefit I am currently receiving when I turn 70 later this year.

But I was told by an agent over the phone that I am still required to file for my own benefit at age 70, and she set me up with a phone appointment. Is this true?

If I do apply and my benefit comes out less than the spousal benefit I have been receiving, will that amount be adjusted so that I can still receive the full 50% of my husband’s benefit? Or will I end up with a smaller amount just for applying?

I can’t see why I should “rock the boat” if I might get benefits taken away. I was just curious when I called in to see if they could figure it over the phone for me to see if I would benefit from the change, but instead I had to set up the appointment.

Answer: You won’t end up with a smaller amount. You’ll either continue with your current benefit or get an increase.

If you didn’t file a restricted application four years ago, then you’re already receiving your own benefit, plus an additional amount so that your checks equal 50% of your husband’s. If that’s the case, there’s no reason to do anything further and your benefits will continue as they are now.

But the phone rep’s insistence that you needed the appointment could mean that you filed what’s known as a “restricted application for spousal benefits only.” That form allowed people born before Jan. 2, 1954, to receive only a spousal benefit while their own benefits continued to grow.

Retirement benefits can increase 8% each year they’re delayed after full retirement age (which for you was 66) and 70, when benefits max out. If your benefit has been growing and is now larger than your current benefit, you’ll get the increase, so it’s certainly worth checking.

Q&A: Resetting the Social Security clock

August 5, 2019 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: I read that you can pay Social Security back the payments you’ve received in order to “reset the clock” and get a larger benefit. Is that true or did I misunderstand the article? My husband started two years ago to claim Social Security benefits at age 67, but if he had waited until he was 70, of course the checks would have been higher for all future payments. Can he pay back to the Social Security administration the amounts already paid to him in order to now claim the higher rate as if he had delayed receiving monthly payments?

Answer: It’s not just his own checks that could have been higher. If he was the higher earner, then the survivor benefit that one of you will receive when the other dies would also have been higher.

Unfortunately, the “do over” option is now only available in the first twelve months after someone begins receiving benefits. People who change their minds during that period can withdraw their Social Security applications, pay back the money they received and then restart their benefits later, when the amounts they get would be larger.

For more information, check out Social Security’s page “If You Change Your Mind” (www.ssa.gov has all sorts of information). After the first year, people can’t withdraw their applications.

Your husband still has the option of suspending his benefit, however. He wouldn’t be able to completely reset the clock, but he also wouldn’t have to pay back all the benefits he received. Instead, every month he waited to restart his checks would increase his benefit by two-thirds of 1% each month (or a total of 8% a year) until he reached age 70, when the benefit would max out.

Social Security representatives have been known to falsely tell people that this option no longer exists, but it’s still available to anyone who has reached full retirement age, which is currently 66.

Q&A: Sorting out the ex’s benefits

July 29, 2019 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: I am 68 and plan to delay starting Social Security until I’m 70. I was married for 15 years prior to an amicable divorce 15 years ago. My ex just turned 60 and remains unmarried but may possibly marry at some future time. Does she qualify for survivor benefits? If so, what can I do to help ensure that she can efficiently apply for that benefit? We have already reviewed her option to assume my benefit upon my demise, but our benefits are virtually at identical levels and so that option does not seem applicable.

Answer: You seem to have confused divorced survivor benefits with divorced spousal benefits. She may well be eligible for both, but the only way you can help her get survivor benefits is to die. It’s great that you two are still friends, but that may be taking friendship a little too far.

Your ex is too young to claim a divorced spousal benefit, which isn’t available until she turns 62. She wouldn’t be able to get the full amount, which is 50% of your benefit at your full retirement age, until she reaches her own full retirement age. If she was born in 1959, then her full retirement age is 66 years and 10 months.

Furthermore, she would get a divorced spousal benefit only if that’s larger than her own benefit. If your benefits are “virtually identical,” that’s not likely to be the case.

If you should keel over tomorrow, though, she would be eligible to receive a divorced survivor benefit and put off receiving her own. Survivor benefits are available starting at age 60, or age 50 if the survivor is disabled, or at any age if the survivor cares for the dead person’s child who is under 16. Your ex also could marry at 60 or older without losing her survivor benefit. People who receive divorced spousal benefits, on the other hand, lose that benefit if they remarry.

Q&A: About the ex’s Social Security

July 1, 2019 By Liz Weston

Dear Liz: I’ve been divorced since 2004. My ex received half of all my pension funds and lives off that and his Social Security. I have not yet drawn Social Security, but I am retired. Am I eligible to receive part of his Social Security? How does that work?

Answer: Yes, if your marriage lasted at least 10 years. If you were born before Jan. 2, 1954, you also have the option of filing a “restricted application” for divorced spousal benefits while allowing your own benefit to continue growing.

Divorced spousal benefits, like regular spousal benefits, allow you to get an amount of up to half your ex’s benefit. The amount would be reduced if you start before your own full retirement age, which is currently 66 and rising to 67 for those born in 1960 and later. If you start at age 62, for example, you would get about one-third of his benefit, rather than half. (Your claim doesn’t take money away from him or any of his current or former spouses, in case you were concerned.)

Regular spousal benefits require that the primary worker has started his or her own retirement benefit. Divorced spousal benefits don’t have that requirement: You both just need to be at least 62. Also, the divorced benefit is based on the primary earner’s benefit at his or her full retirement age. With regular spousal benefits, the amount is typically based on what the primary earner actually receives, which could be less if the primary earner started benefits early.

If you were born on or after Jan. 2, 1954, you can’t file a restricted application. Instead, you’ll be deemed to be applying for both your own benefit and the divorced spousal benefit, and given the larger of the two amounts. You can’t switch to your own benefit later.

If your ex should die before you do, you also would be eligible for a divorced survivor benefit that is up to 100% of his. That has the unfortunate effect of making your ex worth more to you dead than alive.