

Ask the community...
To clarify a key point that's causing confusion: Once you reach age 70, there is NO BENEFIT to waiting longer to apply. Age 70 is the maximum age for delayed retirement credits (DRCs). If you're already 70 in 2025, you should apply now. Waiting until 2026 will not increase your benefit amount through DRCs. The only thing that could potentially increase your benefit by waiting would be if you're still working and replacing a lower-earning year in your calculation with a higher-earning 2025 year. The difference between someone who turned 70 and applied in 2024 versus 2025 is due to the wage indexing in the initial calculation, not because of some advantage to waiting past 70.
wait so if I'm turning 66 this year should I wait till 70? will I get more $$$ that way? or should I just take it now? i'm so confused by all this!!!!
That's a different question from what the original poster asked, but generally: Yes, waiting until 70 will give you a significantly higher monthly benefit (approximately 32% more than at your full retirement age of 66). Whether that's the right choice depends on your health, financial situation, and other factors. But if you're trying to maximize your lifetime benefit and expect to live past roughly age 80, waiting is mathematically advantageous.
One important point that hasn't been mentioned: if your SSDI is approved, you'll likely receive back pay from your application date (or 5 months after your disability onset date, whichever is later). This could be a significant lump sum that would put you over the SSI resource limit again. You should ask your attorney about setting up a PASS (Plan to Achieve Self-Support) account or an ABLE account if you qualify, which are special accounts that don't count toward your SSI resource limit. This can help you manage any back pay without losing eligibility for other benefits. Also, make sure your dire need status is documented regularly. If your financial situation is worsening, have your attorney submit updated information to potentially expedite your case.
It depends on your birth date. Were you born before January 2, 1954? If yes, then you can file a restricted application for spousal benefits only (assuming your husband is already receiving his benefits). If you were born January 2, 1954 or later, then you cannot use this strategy - you'd be subject to deemed filing rules.
To directly answer your question: The earnings you're generating now will only increase your benefit if: 1. They're higher than your lowest indexed earnings year currently being used in your calculation (likely yes if replacing a zero) 2. The recalculation results in a benefit increase of at least $1 (they round down to the nearest dollar) It's important to understand that the actual increase might be small. For example, if you're earning $15,000 this year and it replaces a zero in your calculation, your benefit might increase by just $10-20 per month. This is because the earnings are averaged over 35 years, and the benefit formula is weighted. However, keep working as long as it's not a hardship for you. Those small increases can add up over time, especially if you live a long life. Plus, there's always the chance that Congress could modify or eliminate WEP in the future, which would make those earnings even more valuable.
Social Security automatically recalculates your benefit each year after your employer reports your earnings (typically after you file taxes). If your earnings increase your benefit, they'll make the adjustment and send you a notice. The increase would be effective January of the year following the work. However, there can sometimes be delays in this process. If you believe you should have received an increase based on recent earnings and haven't seen it after filing taxes for that year, it might be worth contacting SSA. Also, regarding your earlier question about trying to reach the substantial earnings threshold to reduce WEP: If you're able to work more without affecting your quality of life, it could be worthwhile. Each year of substantial earnings above 20 reduces your WEP penalty by 5%. So if you're currently at, say, 22 years of substantial earnings, getting to 25 would reduce your WEP penalty by an additional 15%.
Sean Doyle
THE WHOLE SYSTEM IS RIGGED!!!! They got rid of file and suspend, they eliminated restricted application, they tax our benefits, and they STILL haven't fixed the WEP/GPO problems!!! When will Congress stop treating seniors like ATM machines????
0 coins
Zara Rashid
•While there are certainly issues with how Social Security has evolved, the changes to file and suspend and restricted application were actually intended to eliminate strategies that primarily benefited higher-income households. Most people who could afford to delay benefits were higher earners. That said, I do agree that more transparency and consistency in the rules would help everyone.
0 coins
Diego Vargas
Thank you all for the helpful information. I'm disappointed but at least now I understand my options better. I think I'll wait until 70 to maximize my benefit since I can afford to do so at this point. It's frustrating that the rules changed and eliminated this strategy, but I appreciate everyone taking the time to explain it so clearly!
0 coins
Zara Rashid
•That's a good decision if you can afford it. Every year you wait after your FRA adds approximately 8% to your lifetime benefit amount, and that increase is permanent and includes future COLAs. At current life expectancies for women your age, waiting until 70 tends to pay off in the long run.
0 coins