Ask Liz Weston

Get smart with your money

Social Security

Q&A: Can Roth conversions help reduce the widow’s penalty?

By Leave a Comment

Dear Liz: The letter writer who asked about Roth conversions should also consider that they or their spouse will eventually be a widow(er) and will be subject to the income tax “widow’s penalty.”

Roth conversions now protect the survivor against some of that tax bite.

Answer: The widow’s penalty refers to the higher financial burden many survivors face after losing a spouse as they change from “married filing jointly” status to “single” status.

While their incomes may drop, their taxes and other costs may rise.

Having at least some money in a tax-free account can help with this as well as a number of other situations in retirement, which is why it’s important to fund a Roth account during your working years if you can.

The main downside to Roth contributions is that you don’t get an upfront tax break for making them.

Conversions, though, are more complicated.

They trigger a tax bill and can have ripple effects, such as reducing eligibility for tax credits, financial aid or health insurance subsidies.

Late-in-life conversions can increase Medicare premiums and cause more of your Social Security checks to be taxable. That’s why conversions should only be considered after careful consultation with tax pros.

Q&A: Can I switch from my Social Security to a spousal benefit?

By

Dear Liz: I will be 62 in January. My husband turns 70 in July. If I take my Social Security benefits at a reduced rate at 62, can I switch to half of his benefits once he turns 70 and applies? Let’s say my reduced benefit at 62 is $1,000 per month and my husband’s maximized benefit at 70 is $4,000 per month. Can I switch to a spousal benefit for a payment of $2,000?

Answer: You may be able to switch, but you’ll get a lot less than $2,000.

The spousal benefit is based not on what the husband receives, but on his benefit at his full retirement age, which for illustration purposes we’ll say is $3,200. The spousal benefit can be up to half that amount, or $1,600. If you apply at 62, though, you’ll be accepting a permanent reduction in both your own retirement benefit and any future spousal benefit, as I explained in an earlier column. The reduction is steep enough that you probably wouldn’t notice much of a change once your husband applies and you qualify for the spousal addition.

Those are the rules for spousal benefits. Survivor benefits are a different matter. Survivor benefits are based on what your husband actually receives (or what he’s earned, if he dies before starting benefits). Also, the early start of your own benefit wouldn’t reduce the future survivor benefit you receive should he die first.

In many cases, the smart approach to maximizing Social Security benefits means waiting at least until your own full retirement age and often until age 70 to apply. Your mileage may vary, of course, so it can be helpful to use a good Social Security claiming strategies calculator and to carefully read the reports they generate. T. Rowe Price has a free Social Security Optimizer at https://www.troweprice.com/usis/advice/tools/social-security-optimizer/strategy.

Got a question about money? You can submit it here.

Q&A: Can I collect my ex-spouse’s Social Security survivor benefit if he remarries?

By

Dear Liz: I was married 37 years. I claimed Social Security at 62 because I needed the monthly income. I learned too late that if I had waited a few more years, my payment would have been much better. They did tell me that if my ex died before me, I would be entitled to have my amount increased to what he was collecting. He probably will die before me due to some serious health problems. He has since remarried to a widow who is receiving Social Security. Does she become the one who collects my ex’s monthly amount if he dies before her, which would mean she would be collecting two checks a month? And I would lose my ability to have my amount increased? I just want to be prepared for what I can expect when/if he departs before me.

Answer: When people qualify for multiple benefits from Social Security, they get the largest of the amounts available to them. So if your ex’s wife is currently receiving her own or a survivor’s benefit and your ex’s benefit is bigger, she would get this larger check as her survivor’s benefit after his death. She wouldn’t be able to collect on two husbands’ earnings records at the same time.

And what she gets doesn’t affect what you get. Since your marriage lasted at least 10 years, you should be eligible for a divorced survivor benefit of up to 100% of your ex’s benefit. Your survivor benefit would only be reduced if you started it before your own full retirement age.

Got a question about money? You can submit it here.

Q&A: Is it better to take Social Security earlier and invest it?

By

Dear Liz: I’m 64 and retired. My wife is 54 and still working. Half the people I talk to say take Social Security and just invest it, as you’ll make more than waiting until you get older. Others say that the tax hit isn’t worth it because my wife still works. I’ve talked to a couple financial people, and still get mixed answers. What is your opinion?

Answer: Social Security can be surprisingly complicated and many people don’t understand the nuances that should guide claiming decisions. In other words, half the people you’re talking to likely don’t know what they’re talking about.

Let’s start with a few basics, starting with the “tax hit.” If you have income other than Social Security, up to 85% of your benefit may be subject to tax. That doesn’t mean 85% of your benefit is taxed away. It means up to 85% is included in your taxable income, and subject to your tax bracket. In 2026, federal tax brackets range from 10% to 37%.

The earnings test can have a dramatic impact if you start Social Security before your full retirement age. The earnings test reduces your benefit by $1 for every $2 you earn over a certain limit ($24,480 in 2026). If you’re retired and not earning money, though, the earnings test doesn’t apply regardless of what your spouse might earn.

What starting early does do is permanently reduce your benefit. If you’re the higher earner, it also reduces the survivor benefit that one of you will get when the other dies. At that point, the smaller of a couple’s two checks goes away and the survivor has to make do with a single benefit.

If you delay, on the other hand, your benefit gets larger. After full retirement age, delayed retirement credits add 8% each year until your benefit maxes out at age 70. This guaranteed return is about twice what you’d currently get from any other low-risk investment, such as one-year Treasuries. You might earn more in the stock market, but you also could suffer losses.

Copious research shows that most people are better off delaying. You can start by reading “How Much Lifetime Social Security Benefits Are Americans Leaving On the Table?” by David Altig, Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Victor Yifan Ye for the National Bureau of Economic Research at https://www.nber.org/papers/w30675.

Q&A: Will Taking Social Security at 62 Affect Your Spousal or Survivor Benefit?

By

Dear Liz: I am a teacher, retiring this June. I have my teacher’s pension and will receive a small Social Security benefit as well. I am married and my husband’s Social Security benefits are far greater than mine. Should I start drawing on my Social Security benefits next year when I turn 62, assuming when my husband starts drawing on his when he turns 70 in seven years I will then get a higher benefit? Is there any downside to taking my Social Security benefits for seven years while I wait for him to start taking his?

Answer: Your early start would reduce the future spousal benefit you’ll be eligible for when your husband applies at age 70, says Mary Beth Franklin, a former Investment News columnist and author of “Maximizing Social Security Benefits.” The early start would not, however, reduce your future survivor benefit should your husband die first.

Spousal and survivor benefits are both based on your husband’s work record, but they’re calculated using different rules.

Spousal benefits can be up to 50% of your husband’s benefit at his full retirement age. If you’re already receiving your own benefit, the spousal “top off” adds an additional amount to your check once your husband applies and you’re eligible for a spousal benefit. The top off amount is calculated by subtracting your benefit at full retirement age (FRA) from 50% of your husband’s benefit at full retirement age.

A simplified example may help show the effect of an early start. Let’s suppose your own retirement benefit would be $1,000 a month at age 67 and your husband’s benefit at his full retirement age would be $3,000. Social Security subtracts your FRA benefit ($1,000) from half of his ($1,500) to determine the “top off” amount ($500). If you apply for your own unreduced benefit at age 67, the top off amount would be added once your husband applies for his benefit and triggers a spousal benefit for you.

If you start early, on the other hand, your own benefit would be permanently reduced. Starting at 62 means you’d receive $700 a month. Once your husband applies and the spousal benefit is triggered, you’d get the additional $500, but now you’d be receiving $1,200 a month instead of $1,500 you would get if you’d waited.

That doesn’t mean you should delay, Franklin notes. The additional cash could make it easier for your husband to put off filing. And, as noted above, an early start on your own benefit wouldn’t affect any future survivor benefit.

While spousal benefits are based on your husband’s benefit at full retirement age, survivor benefits are based on what he actually receives (or what he had earned, if he dies before starting benefits). If your husband waits to file until after his full retirement age, his benefit earns 8% annual delayed retirement credits until his benefit maxes out at age 70. As a survivor, you would be eligible to receive up to 100% of that benefit.

Q&A: The not-so-hidden costs of claiming Social Security at 62

By

Dear Liz: I’ll be 62 next year. I planned to start taking my Social Security of about $2,600 a month and just put that check into an investment account until I retire. However, if I’m going to be taxed $1 for every $2 over $23,000 that I make, then my plan needs to change. Maybe I should wait until 67. I make around $180,000 a year and that should continue until I retire. I loved my plan and am really disappointed that I cannot put it into play.

Answer: Sometimes the things we love aren’t good for us. Your plan would have shortchanged you and possibly your spouse.

You wouldn’t actually pay a 50% tax on your Social Security if you applied at age 62. What you would face is the earnings test, which withholds $1 for every $2 you earn over a certain amount, which is $24,480 in 2026. Given your income, your entire benefit would be withheld.

The earnings test would apply until you reached your full retirement age of 67. At that point, any money that was withheld would be added back into your benefit.

What isn’t added back is the additional money you would have received simply by postponing your application. If you wait, your benefit would grow about 30% between age 62 and 67. After 67, delayed retirement credits boost your benefit by 8% each year you delay until age 70, when your benefit maxes out. In addition, your benefit gets cost-of-living increases beginning at age 62, whether or not you’ve applied.

Those are guaranteed returns, by the way. Other investment returns are not. You could make more in the stock market, but you also could make less or lose money.

If you’re married and the higher earner, an early start would also stunt the survivor’s benefit. The effect can be so dramatic on the survivor’s finances that financial planners typically advise the higher earner to wait as long as possible to apply.