

Ask the community...
Just to give you a concrete example with numbers to help with your planning: If your combined income is $65,000 (including half of her SS benefits of $9,000), then you'd be well into the range where 85% of her benefits would be taxable. With a $1,500 monthly benefit: - $1,500 × 12 = $18,000 annual SS benefit - 85% of $18,000 = $15,300 taxable amount - At a 12% federal tax bracket, that's roughly $1,836 in taxes on her benefits for the year - Monthly equivalent: about $153/month in taxes So if she chooses 10% withholding ($150/month), she'd receive $1,350 monthly and be very close to covering the tax liability on the benefits.
Don't forget that the $1500 benefit amount on the SSA website assumes you continue working until your FRA with the same income. If she's retiring completely at 62, the actual benefit might be a bit lower than what's estimated. Might be worth checking with SSA directly to get a more accurate figure before you finalize your budget.
I'm really confused about all this WEP talk. I thought WEP only applied to people who didn't pay into Social Security enough quarters? Or is that the other one... GPO? I get them mixed up. My husband worked for the railroad and I know his pension affected something with my benefits but I can never remember which is which...
You're confusing WEP and GPO. WEP (Windfall Elimination Provision) reduces your OWN Social Security benefit if you worked in jobs where you didn't pay Social Security taxes (like some government or foreign jobs) AND also worked enough in SS-covered jobs to qualify for benefits. GPO (Government Pension Offset) reduces spouse/survivor benefits if you receive a pension from non-covered government work. The railroad retirement system has special coordination with Social Security that works differently from either of these provisions.
The good news with the WEP reform proposals is that there seems to be bipartisan support for some kind of fix. The bad news is that they've been trying to fix it for years with no success yet. For those wondering about the status, there are currently multiple bills in Congress addressing WEP reform. Some call for full repeal, others for a modified formula that's less punitive. Most include some retroactive payments for those already affected, though likely not full retroactive amounts going back years. I think it's smart that you delayed benefits to age 72 regardless of what happens with WEP reform. That 40% increase for delaying claim from 67 to 72 is substantial and would help offset the WEP reduction even if reform never passes.
Yes, that was my thinking at the time - that delaying would at least partially offset the WEP reduction. What I didn't anticipate was potentially getting both the full non-WEP amount AND the delayed credits if reform passes. That would be a significant windfall for me and others in similar situations. Do you happen to know which specific bill has the most support currently? I'd like to contact my representatives about it.
The Social Security Fairness Act (H.R. 82 in the last Congress) had the most co-sponsors, but there are other bills with different approaches too. The Ways & Means Committee has also discussed compromise solutions. Best approach is to contact your rep and express support for WEP reform generally rather than a specific bill, since the final solution might be a compromise version.
Will your daughter be going to college? My friends kid still got survivor benefits during college so maybe look into that too!
That's actually incorrect information. Survivor benefits for children stop at age 18 (or 19 if still in high school). They do NOT continue during college unless the child is disabled before age 22. This is a common misconception because the rules changed decades ago. Prior to 1981, college students could receive benefits until age 22, but that provision was eliminated.
Thank you all for the helpful information! I think I'm going to encourage her to take the job since she won't lose all benefits, just a reduction. We'll definitely report it to SSA right away and I'll make sure to keep track of her annual earnings. I appreciate everyone's advice!
Good decision. One last tip: keep detailed records of all communications with SSA (dates, times, names of representatives) and copies of any documents you submit. If there's ever a dispute about whether you properly reported the income change, having documentation can make all the difference. Best of luck to your daughter with her new job opportunity!
Anybody else think its messed up that people have to jump through all these hoops just to afford medication?? My sister is going through the same mess with her MS meds. This is why I'm terrified of retiring even though my back is killing me from 40 years of construction work...
its totally messed up!! we spend more time figuring out how to afford meds than actually enjoying retirement. my neighbor went back to work at 72 just to afford his heart medication. the whole system is broken.
I wanted to add one more important point: When your husband applies in January 2025, make absolutely sure that on the application he specifies January 2025 as his "benefit start date" even though he's requesting retroactive benefits. This prevents any confusion in the processing center. Also, keep documentation of everything - when you applied, what you requested, etc. If the pharmaceutical program requires income verification during the year, you may need to explain your strategy to them as well.
Evelyn Xu
She asked her accountant for a recommendation. Be careful though - make sure they're a fiduciary (legally obligated to act in your best interest) and not just someone selling retirement products!
0 coins
Jordan Walker
One more thing to consider - if you're still working, you might want to delay claiming until you fully retire or reach your FRA. Benefits claimed at 62 are reduced by about 30% permanently compared to claiming at 67 (your FRA). However, if you wait until 70, you get an 8% increase for each year after FRA. That's a potential range from 70% of your full benefit (claiming at 62) to 124% (claiming at 70). This is why getting a personalized analysis is so important. For some people, claiming early makes sense; for others, waiting is better. It depends on your health, longevity in your family, other income sources, and immediate financial needs.
0 coins
Emily Sanjay
•Thank you, this is really helpful! I need to think about this carefully - my mom lived to 92 but I don't have much saved up, so I'm torn between taking it early or trying to maximize. Looks like I need to create that account and see the actual numbers first.
0 coins