

Ask the community...
i think they sometimes do this on purpose to save money. my neighbor had something similar and they kept "losing" his paperwork for like 6 months!! he had to get really mad and threaten to call his congressman before they finally fixed it. the whole system is rigged to make it hard for us seniors!!
EXACTLY!!! SS is trying to save money by making things so complicated that people give up! My moms friend waited 9 MONTHS for them to fix a payment issue. Its not an accident that there system is so broken!!!
Having worked at SSA for many years, I can assure you this isn't an intentional delay tactic. The reality is that SSA's computer systems were built in the 1980s and have been patched together with updates over decades. Different parts of the system don't communicate well with each other. Withdrawal cases are particularly complicated because they touch multiple systems - benefits, earnings records, treasury payments, and tax reporting. It's a genuine technical limitation, not a conspiracy to deny benefits. The agency is actually working on a massive systems overhaul, but it will take years to complete.
Update: I just got back from another office visit after using all the specific terminology suggested here. What a difference! I asked for a Technical Expert specifically and mentioned "Critical Payment Correction" and "Administrative Action Review." The TE actually found that my payment HAD been recorded but in a different part of their system than what shows on my online account. They're initiating a correction process that she said should take about 2 weeks to sync up their records. In the meantime, they're starting my survivor benefits provisionally! Thank you all SO MUCH for your help with this - I would never have known what to ask for without your suggestions.
That's fantastic news! I'm so glad you were able to get this resolved. This is exactly why it's important to use the correct terminology - it helps cut through layers of confusion. The provisional benefits are especially good news since that means you won't have to wait for the full administrative correction to be completed before receiving income. Be sure to keep documentation of everything, including the name of the Technical Expert who helped you, just in case there are any future questions about this situation.
this might sound stupid but i thought survivor benefits were only for ppl who never worked? if u were working and getting ssdi on ur own record why would u even qualify for anything from his record?
Not a stupid question at all! Many people misunderstand this. You can qualify for benefits on your own work record AND be eligible for survivor benefits from your deceased spouse's record. Social Security will pay you the higher of the two amounts, not both combined (with a few specific exceptions). For example, if your own retirement benefit is $1,800/month but your potential survivor benefit would be $2,100/month, you could receive the $2,100 instead. You're always entitled to the higher amount, regardless of whether you worked or not.
After reading through this thread, I'd like to add one important point: even if it turns out you can't get retroactive payments, you should still pursue this because if your survivor benefit is higher than your current benefit, you can switch to it now and increase your monthly payment going forward. At age 70, that could mean many years of higher benefits. One strategy to consider: when you contact SSA, first ask for an explanation of what your husband's benefit would have been if he had lived to claiming age, with all applicable COLAs. Get that specific number before discussing any retroactive claim issues. This separates the question of "what should I be receiving now" from the more complicated question of "what should I have received in the past.
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.
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.
Javier Hernandez
what about that thing where if u worked for the government ur ss gets cut? my friend had that happen, windfall something?
0 coins
Natasha Petrova
•That's the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and Government Pension Offset (GPO). These have been part of Social Security law since the 1980s and only affect people who receive pensions from jobs where they didn't pay Social Security taxes. It's not a recent cut and doesn't apply to the vast majority of workers who paid into Social Security throughout their careers.
0 coins
Paolo Marino
I really appreciate everyone's input. I think I'm going to take a breath and not make a hasty decision based on fear. The 25% permanent reduction would be a big hit to take just to avoid a theoretical future cut that might not even happen, especially since it sounds like near-retirees like me would likely be protected anyway. Still anxious about it, but at least I understand the situation better now. I'll talk to my financial planner again with this new perspective.
0 coins
LunarLegend
•That's a wise approach. One additional point to consider: if you're still working, there's also an earnings limit until you reach full retirement age. In 2025, you'll lose $1 in benefits for every $2 you earn above $22,750 (approximately). So if you're still earning decent income, that's another reason waiting might make financial sense in your situation.
0 coins