

Ask the community...
All this FRA and earning limit stuff is why I just waited until I fully stopped working to claim SS!!! The rules are IMPOSSIBLE to understand and I was terrified of messing up and owing them money later. SSA is the WORST at explaining their own rules clearly!!! 😡😡😡
Same!! I waited until I completely retired too. My neighbor tried to do this partial year thing and ended up with an overpayment notice a year later. Too much hassle!
The rules can seem complicated, but they're actually quite straightforward once you understand them. The key is just knowing which income counts (work earnings) and which doesn't (pensions, investments, etc.). For most people reaching FRA with modest work income, there's usually no benefit reduction at all.
My sister just went through this! Very important - make sure you tell Social Security your EXACT planned retirement date when you apply. She told them she'd work until June but then decided to quit in February, and didn't notify them. They kept withholding benefits based on her original income estimate and it took months to fix. Just keep SSA updated on any changes to your work plans!
That's a great point! I'm pretty set on my part-time schedule through April, but if anything changes, I'll definitely let them know right away. Did your sister have to pay anything back?
No, she actually got money BACK since she earned less than she originally told them she would. They sent her a nice unexpected check about 6 months later!
Is your husband gettin SSI or SSDI? if its SSI then u DO hve to report his earnings every month cuz thats need-based!!!!
The poster mentioned her husband is 71 and collecting retirement benefits, not SSI or SSDI. You're right that SSI has different reporting requirements because it's need-based, but that doesn't apply in this situation. Regular Social Security retirement benefits past full retirement age don't require manual reporting of earnings.
I think people who say SS automatically recalculates are being optimistic lol. My brother-in-law had to actually request a recalculation after working 3 years past retirement. Maybe it's supposed to be automatic but with the govt who knows if it actually happens!
You raise a good point. While SSA is supposed to automatically recalculate benefits when new earnings might increase your benefit, the system isn't perfect. If your husband continues working for more than a year past full retirement age, it wouldn't hurt to contact SSA every couple of years to request a benefits review. You can do this by calling their main number at 1-800-772-1213 or contacting your local office.
Have u tried contacting your congressional representative? My friend is a retired police officer who had issues with WEP and his congress person's office helped straighten it out. They have staff who specifically handle SS problems!
This is actually excellent advice that people often overlook. Congressional caseworkers can sometimes get answers and action from SSA much faster than individuals can. They won't change the law for you, but they can help ensure it's being applied correctly in your case.
After learning about how WEP works, I discovered that SSA had missed some of my substantial earnings years from when I worked summers during my teaching career. I was able to get my WEP reduction decreased by providing proof of those earnings. The WEP formula provides a 5% reduction in the penalty for each year of substantial earnings over 20 years, so each additional year you can document is worth fighting for.
One other thing to consider is that if your brother passes away (hopefully not for many decades!), your SIL would be eligible for survivor benefits. Those are calculated differently than spousal benefits. As a widow, she could get 100% of what your brother was receiving if she's at her full retirement age when she claims survivor benefits. However, if she claims survivor benefits early, they'll be reduced. The reduction factors for survivor benefits are different than for retirement or spousal benefits. This is why Social Security planning for couples often involves considering the higher earner delaying as long as possible (to age 70 ideally) to maximize the survivor benefit for whichever spouse lives longer.
This is a really good point. My financial advisor always said the higher earning spouse should try to delay until 70 if possible, especially if there's a big difference in benefit amounts between spouses.
After reading through this whole thread, I think your SIL has essentially three options: 1) Claim now at 63 and accept permanent reductions to both her retirement AND spousal benefits. This gives her income now but less income later. 2) Wait until her FRA to claim either benefit. This maximizes her spousal benefit when your brother claims. 3) A compromise approach: If she absolutely needs income now, she could consider whether she qualifies for any other benefits (like spousal benefits from a previous marriage if applicable) or look at other income sources to bridge the gap until FRA. The deemed filing rules that took effect for people born after January 1, 1954, eliminated many of the clever claiming strategies that used to exist. Now, when you file for one benefit, you're effectively filing for all benefits you're eligible for.
This summary is incredibly helpful. I'll discuss these options with them. I think they were hoping there was some clever strategy that would let her claim now without penalizing her later spousal benefit, but it sounds like those loopholes have been closed. Really appreciate everyone's insights!
Hugh Intensity
The REAL QUESTION is how they're going to pay for this!!! Repealing GPO/WEP would cost billions and SS is already headed for trouble. They'll probably just increase the debt more or raise taxes on everyone. Nothing is free - we'll all end up paying for it one way or another.
0 coins
Romeo Quest
•isnt it just fixing an unfair penalty though? teachers and firefighters paid into their pensions instead of SS, not their fault the systems dont work together right
0 coins
Hugh Intensity
•It's more complicated than that. The original purpose of GPO/WEP was to prevent "double-dipping" from two different government-subsidized retirement systems. Yes it's unfair in many cases, but repealing it without accounting for the cost is irresponsible. They should FIX it with a more proportional approach, not just ELIMINATE it entirely!
0 coins
Eve Freeman
I just went through all this with my financial advisor last week. Here's what she told me (I'm also a former teacher with pension): 1) The current GPO reduces spousal/widow benefits by 2/3 of your government pension 2) Most pending legislation would phase out GPO over 5 years (20% reduction each year) 3) For spouses, there's NO benefit to waiting beyond FRA - you get 50% of your spouse's PIA at FRA 4) For survivor benefits (after spouse dies), there IS benefit to waiting up to age 70 5) Keep good records of your pension and SS communications Her advice was to wait until FRA to avoid the early filing reduction. In your case at 65.5, it's only about a 6% reduction, so if you need the money now and GPO is repealed, it might be worth taking slightly reduced benefits.
0 coins
Everett Tutum
•Thank you for sharing this advice! The 5-year phase-in is something I hadn't considered in my planning. That's helpful to know about survivor benefits too - I didn't realize those could increase up to age 70 unlike spousal benefits that max at FRA. Sounds like I should start gathering all my pension documentation now to be prepared if/when the repeal happens.
0 coins