SS survivor question?
SS survivor question?
I thought the survivor benefit was the larger of the two benefits.
Example:
H takes SS at 62=$10,468
W takes SS at 62=$22,032
H dies W survivor=$22,032
W dies H survivor=$$22,032
Is that correct?
Anyone use http://www.sscalc.net/
They say:
H dies W survivor=$22,032
W dies H survivor=$26,572
How can this be?
Example:
H takes SS at 62=$10,468
W takes SS at 62=$22,032
H dies W survivor=$22,032
W dies H survivor=$$22,032
Is that correct?
Anyone use http://www.sscalc.net/
They say:
H dies W survivor=$22,032
W dies H survivor=$26,572
How can this be?
"In investing, what is comfortable is rarely profitable." - Robert Arnott
- ObliviousInvestor
- Posts: 4212
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:32 am
- Contact:
Re: SS survivor question?
Not exactly. One key difference is explained here:VA_Gent wrote:I thought the survivor benefit was the larger of the two benefits.
http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/404/404-0338.htm
(c) Your monthly benefit will be reduced if the insured person chooses to receive old-age benefits before reaching full retirement age. If so, your benefit will be reduced to the amount the insured person would be receiving if alive, or 82 1/2 percent of his or her primary insurance amount, whichever is larger.
Mike Piper |
Roth is a name, not an acronym. If you type ROTH, you're just yelling about retirement accounts.
Re: SS survivor question?
But why does it increase for the husband to an amount greater than the wife was getting?
"In investing, what is comfortable is rarely profitable." - Robert Arnott
- ObliviousInvestor
- Posts: 4212
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:32 am
- Contact:
Re: SS survivor question?
Well, the wife would have been getting less than 82.5% of her PIA, if she filed for her retirement benefit at age 62. So the, "or 82.5% of his or her PIA, whichever is larger," part kicks in.VA_Gent wrote:But why does it increase for the husband to an amount greater than the wife was getting?
There may be something else at work though as well. (Alternatively, it's also possible the calculator is incorrect.) Knowing the birth years for the people in question would be helpful.
Mike Piper |
Roth is a name, not an acronym. If you type ROTH, you're just yelling about retirement accounts.
Re: SS survivor question?
Links to examples:ObliviousInvestor wrote:Well, the wife would have been getting less than 82.5% of her PIA, if she filed for her retirement benefit at age 62. So the, "or 82.5% of his or her PIA, whichever is larger," part kicks in.VA_Gent wrote:But why does it increase for the husband to an amount greater than the wife was getting?
There may be something else at work though as well. (Alternatively, it's also possible the calculator is incorrect.) Knowing the birth years for the people in question would be helpful.
http://www.sscalc.net/r_m/6262_report1424464294.25.php5
http://www.sscalc.net/r_m/6262_report1424464688.02.php5
"In investing, what is comfortable is rarely profitable." - Robert Arnott
- ObliviousInvestor
- Posts: 4212
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:32 am
- Contact:
Re: SS survivor question?
With birth years of 1968 and 1969, both spouses have a full retirement age of 67. So, if they claim retirement benefits ASAP at 62, they'll be getting 70% of their respective primary insurance amounts.VA_Gent wrote:Links to examples:ObliviousInvestor wrote:Well, the wife would have been getting less than 82.5% of her PIA, if she filed for her retirement benefit at age 62. So the, "or 82.5% of his or her PIA, whichever is larger," part kicks in.VA_Gent wrote:But why does it increase for the husband to an amount greater than the wife was getting?
There may be something else at work though as well. (Alternatively, it's also possible the calculator is incorrect.) Knowing the birth years for the people in question would be helpful.
http://www.sscalc.net/r_m/6262_report1424464294.25.php5
http://www.sscalc.net/r_m/6262_report1424464688.02.php5
We can back into the wife's PIA by dividing $1,836 by 0.7, which gives us $2,623. The minimum survivor benefit would be 82.5% of that, which is $2,164 per month ($25,968 per year), if claimed after reaching FRA. That's definitely more than what the deceased wife was receiving, but it doesn't agree with the calculator.
The calculator has the survivor receiving $26,572 per year, in a scenario in which the survivor benefit is claimed at 66 (i.e., prior to FRA). I'm not sure where that's coming from (though it's certainly possible that they're right and I'm missing something).
Mike Piper |
Roth is a name, not an acronym. If you type ROTH, you're just yelling about retirement accounts.
Re: SS survivor question?
Logically it would seem what works for the W should work the H equally. This does not compute.
a bug?
I emailed SScalc.net and am awaiting a response.
a bug?
I emailed SScalc.net and am awaiting a response.
"In investing, what is comfortable is rarely profitable." - Robert Arnott
Re: SS survivor question?
They both take SS at 62. Several years go by then no matter when they die, it appears the lower earner (H or W)gets a larger amount.
"In investing, what is comfortable is rarely profitable." - Robert Arnott
Re: SS survivor question?
Lower earners do get a better (higher) benefit - the system is designed in that way because it is a "social" program.VA_Gent wrote:They both take SS at 62. Several years go by then no matter when they die, it appears the lower earner (H or W)gets a larger amount.
-
- Posts: 7189
- Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 11:25 am
Re: SS survivor question?
Are H & W exactly the same age? I think it makes a big difference and it's implied but you don't really say for sure.VA_Gent wrote:I thought the survivor benefit was the larger of the two benefits.
Example:
H takes SS at 62=$10,468
W takes SS at 62=$22,032
H dies W survivor=$22,032
W dies H survivor=$$22,032
Is that correct?
Anyone use http://www.sscalc.net/
They say:
H dies W survivor=$22,032
W dies H survivor=$26,572
How can this be?
JW
Retired at Last
Re: SS survivor question?
Thanks for the replies.
I did not know the survivor gets 82.5% of PIA , even though they both started out with 70% of PIA.
Very interesting rule.
I did not know the survivor gets 82.5% of PIA , even though they both started out with 70% of PIA.
Very interesting rule.
"In investing, what is comfortable is rarely profitable." - Robert Arnott
Re: SS survivor question?
Oblivious –
Is your calculation correct? Should you be using .75 instead of .7? I may not be understanding something of course.
From the table in your blog post of 7/20/2012 if someone claims at age 62 they are getting 75% of their PIA. One of the examples used to illustrate that post has person that “decided to claim as early as possible, at age 62 (48 months prior to FRA)”.
From the table in the same post:
4 years before FRA 75% of PIA
$1,836 divided by 0.75 which gives $2,448. 82.5% of that amount is $2,020.
http://www.obliviousinvestor.com/how-so ... alculated/
Is your calculation correct? Should you be using .75 instead of .7? I may not be understanding something of course.
From the table in your blog post of 7/20/2012 if someone claims at age 62 they are getting 75% of their PIA. One of the examples used to illustrate that post has person that “decided to claim as early as possible, at age 62 (48 months prior to FRA)”.
From the table in the same post:
4 years before FRA 75% of PIA
$1,836 divided by 0.75 which gives $2,448. 82.5% of that amount is $2,020.
http://www.obliviousinvestor.com/how-so ... alculated/
- ObliviousInvestor
- Posts: 4212
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:32 am
- Contact:
Re: SS survivor question?
In the article, the person has an FRA of 66, so 62 is 4 years prior to FRA (resulting in a 25% reduction). Using the birthdates in the OP's example, both people have an FRA of 67, meaning that 62 is 5 years prior to FRA (resulting in a 30% reduction).derosa wrote:Oblivious –
Is your calculation correct? Should you be using .75 instead of .7? I may not be understanding something of course.
From the table in your blog post of 7/20/2012 if someone claims at age 62 they are getting 75% of their PIA. One of the examples used to illustrate that post has person that “decided to claim as early as possible, at age 62 (48 months prior to FRA)”.
From the table in the same post:
4 years before FRA 75% of PIA
$1,836 divided by 0.75 which gives $2,448. 82.5% of that amount is $2,020.
http://www.obliviousinvestor.com/how-so ... alculated/
Mike Piper |
Roth is a name, not an acronym. If you type ROTH, you're just yelling about retirement accounts.
Re: SS survivor question?
Thanks for your patience on this one! I completely overlooked the birth year dates - sorry about that. I knew you couldn't be wrong based on years of reading your articles but i wasn't seeing it.
This was a topic that hit me with great interest. I don't think I have ever seen anything about this small widow/widower calculation that could impact people who both retire and claim early. We have benefits within $10 of each other and are only 1 month apart in age.
So I had just assumed that there would be no value in a survivor benefit. What is there to choose from if the benefit amounts are the same? It is not as if one was significantly larger than the other.
So based on this I see a small, about 10%, increase in social security monthly benefit for the survivor over their current benefit. Not a windfall but it is definitely something and will be appreciated.
This was a topic that hit me with great interest. I don't think I have ever seen anything about this small widow/widower calculation that could impact people who both retire and claim early. We have benefits within $10 of each other and are only 1 month apart in age.
So I had just assumed that there would be no value in a survivor benefit. What is there to choose from if the benefit amounts are the same? It is not as if one was significantly larger than the other.
So based on this I see a small, about 10%, increase in social security monthly benefit for the survivor over their current benefit. Not a windfall but it is definitely something and will be appreciated.
- ObliviousInvestor
- Posts: 4212
- Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 9:32 am
- Contact:
Re: SS survivor question?
Always happy to answer questions.derosa wrote:Thanks for your patience on this one!
Mike Piper |
Roth is a name, not an acronym. If you type ROTH, you're just yelling about retirement accounts.