Bogleheads.org

How does medicare know who your medigap company is? In other words, do you have to notify medicare after you sign up for a medigap plan, or what? And if I understand what you said correctly, the doctor would not even need your medigap information since medicare bills the medigap plan? I know this is simple once you've done it, but right now I am just trying to wrap my head around who does what. I've read hundreds of articles, but when it gets right down to the mechanics of it, they leave you wondering. Thanks.

Just went back and re-read agent 99's post and think it answered the billing thing. I'm letting it soak in...

DetroitRick, you mentioned you received a bill for the part B deductible. I was wondering about that, who sends the bill, the provider or the medigap company?

OP here. All good points I am absorbing. You know, some of the stuff I've read implies that with original medicare and a medigap supplement, you basically have no problems (except paying the premium!!). I don't mind paying more upfront if I can avoid all, or most, problems later should I get really sick. I would just hate to go the original route, rather than the advantage route, then have to deal with problems later like rejected claims, etc. In other words, I would just really like to know what I am paying for with a medigap supplement plan. That is why boards like this are helpful since some of you have actually been through this stuff.

OK, I get what you all are saying so far. With or without a medigap supplement, it just seems too good to be true that you could keep going to multiple doctors looking for a cure before someone (medicare or medigap) would say Whoa! and quit paying. Not that I would do that, but I could see a hypochondriac for example just going over and over since it wouldn't cost them (assuming medigap). Maybe I'm just used to begging for service, and like I said this seems to good to be true.

Quick couple of Medicare questions: (1) does original medicare cover annual doctor visits required for renewing a prescription - my doctor will only write a refill for thyroid medicine if I come in once a year for blood test (2) if you go to the doctor and they can't fix your problem and you decide to go see another doctor does medicare cover that, or are you just stuck with the first doctor for better or worse. For example, a while back I had months of itching that just wouldn't go away. I saw dermatologists, allergists, etc. My employer insurance covered this, but I had to get pre-approved. Finally the original doctor just put me on Zyrtec and it's better. Anyway, once I go on medicare, if something like this happens, can I just go specia...

Those are some good points, thank you.

I have heard of enrolled agents but don't know what they do. Are they more qualified than a regular tax preparer? Are they common if you just search for one locally?

I do my own taxes, but should I get something complicated, or should I die and my wife need tax help, do you think a CPA who does taxes, or a tax preparer (or firm like Block) would be better. My gut feeling is that a CPA would be more educated, but not necessarily more educated on taxes. And a CPA might be interested in doing taxes as a sideline, since they are qualified to do more. As for a tax preparer, if that's all they do, they probably do it well, and don't have to spend time knowing things a CPA might need to know. So I am not belittling either, just thinking about who is really better at taxes. By the way, I am just talking about general taxes a household might encounter (selling stocks, collecting social security, dealing with cap...

John Doe, after reading these posts and getting a better understanding I think I agree with you, less complicated to just sell in IRA and re-buy outside IRA. And you read my mind - I was going to ask if there were any wash sale rule against this !!!

Yes, that sounds like what I sort of expected was possible but wasn't sure. I have a ways to go before I reach RMD age but am trying to learn before then. As far as the taxes go, I will have to look at how you report an in kind transfer like this on your return, unless you happen to know off the top of your head. thanks

I understand RMD's in general, like when to take them, how much etc. But here's my question - If you hold a stock inside your IRA worth $1000 and you need to take a distribution of $1000, do you have to sell that stock, then transfer the cash out of the IRA, then claim that transfer on your taxes? Or can you somehow transfer the stock to a trading account, and claim the value of the stock on your taxes?

I agree that it is quite probably a moot point but I just like understanding everything before making a move. Don't want to get burned by going in blind !!!

Homes in the neighborhood have been selling between 700K and 800K over the last year, but have been coming down. If I sold for 800K and assumed about 8% fees from that, I would net about 736K, then deduct 280K and I would have a gain of 456K. Assuming lower fees would put me closer to the 500K exclusion, and assuming a little higher selling price would also put me closer. So yes it probably doesn't matter, but it's sort of close enough to establish as much basis as I can.

OK, I keep digging into these numbers, and the 4,360 seller credit went entirely to fees that were loan related, and which would not add to basis. The REMAINING fees like escrow fee, title insurance, etc which would add to basis were not paid from the credit. So I think my basis would be the sales price minus the credit plus these remaining fees I paid for. So 280,000 - 4,360 + 1,200 = 276,840. The total fees were 5,560 (4,360 seller paid / 1,200 buyer paid). Once I was able to pinpoint exactly which fees were associated with the credit, I realized they were all of the ones that would not affect the basis since they all had to do with the loan. The only ones left were ones that would affect basis, and they were all on my dime. Am I on the r...

Unfortunately my statement is the old style HUD statement, not the newer closing disclosure statement that shows buyer vs. seller funding. My form just shows debits and credits.

Okay, I will do my best to simplify this - The sales price was 280,000. I paid 7,500 deposit, 50,000 at closing, and took a loan for 225,000. So my all-in cost was 282,500. On the settlement document, there is a "credit from seller for non recurring costs" of 4,360. The 4,360 balances exactly with all the non recurring closing costs on the statement (including loan related fees which I know do not add to basis). There are other closing costs such as pre-paid HOA dues, pre-paid insurance to satisfy the lender etc. which are not part of the seller credit. So in other words, I can see on the statement, line by line, where the 282,500 of my cost went. It seems that if the seller credited a certain amount, then that effectively just lo...

I am thinking of selling my home that I purchased about 25 years ago. I bought in new from a developer. As part of the deal, the developer agreed to credit me for non recurring closing costs. I have no way of inserting a photo of the settlement statement, but there is an entry in the debit column named "credit from seller for non recurring costs". So items like escrow fee, title insurance, recording fees, etc. were credited. My question is this: even though I was "credited" with these amounts, they were still paid for through escrow with MY funds. So do these amounts add to my basis along with the actual purchase price of the house? Or does the fact that I was credited these amounts (and probably a tax deduction for the ...

I live in a nice neighborhood where people have big nice backyards, and yet they let the kids play in the street in the front. They even put up little signs in the street saying "children playing". To the original poster, and this not being snide or anything, but maybe a condo or townhouse would be better. That way, no backyard to pay for or keep up, and the kids could just play in the street.

Yes, the wife is listed as beneficiary. And both IRA's are at the same brokerage luckily for us.

Thank you.

Hi Alan, to make future problems simpler for my wife if I die, would the simplest thing to do be to just roll it over into her IRA since she would have no other rollovers besides that one? I think she would have a difficult time enough trying to manage one IRA much less two since I do all this stuff now, and even I don't get a lot of it !!

I read up on the Pub 590-B and it did talk about keeping the IRA as you own, rolling it over into your IRA etc., but didn't really address the specifics of what your referred to as "in-kind". Still kind of wanting to know more about this.

Just thought of this question as well - if I never file for benefits and die, and my wife waits until her full retirement age, does my retirement amount that she is delaying grow with COLA increased even though I am dead and never filed?

Thanks for the help. I try to study this stuff as much as I can, then get a reality check to make sure I am not missing something, so you folks helping out is appreciated.

That's what I would have thought but wanted to make sure. And I did understand what you said about spousal benefits being different than non-spousal benefits. Automatic for spousal benefits and not automatic for the rest is what you are saying then just to be sure. Thanks.

If a person is collecting their own Social Security and their spouse dies, and they decide to NOT switch to survivor benefits until their survivor full retirement age, do they need to notify social security of this decision? For example, let's say the widow is collecting $1000 per month. When the husband dies, she could now collect a reduced widow benefit of $1200, or she could wait a couple of years and collect an unreduced amount of $1300. In this scenario, would social security automatically switch her to the $1200 simply because it's higher than her current $1000, even though delaying would drive it even a little higher?

Let's say a married person dies and both spouses have traditional IRA's in the same brokerage. The surviving spouse gets the deceased spouse's IRA, but the question is this - if the deceased persons IRA has securities in it (treasuries, mutual funds, etc.), do these have to be liquidated before transferring it to the survivor's IRA? Or can the securities be transferred within the IRA? I am not in this situation currently, but have been thinking about it more and more as I get older. Thanks.

Yeah, they say it "may be considered" but don't seem to really know. If it turns out to be federally taxable, I would think it would be taxable in the year RECIEVED - isn't that the way income is generally handled?

Has anyone seen any guidance yet on the FEDERAL taxability of the California Middle Class Tax Refund. California says it's not taxable by the state, but says you need to check on your own if it's taxable by the IRS. The few things I could find suggest that maybe it's still not resolved. I started entering data into H&R Block software, and in the California state section under income adjustments it has a box to check called MCTR Payment - if you click "learn more" it says "The California Middle Class Tax Refund is a one time payment issued to provide relief to qualified recipients. California lets you subtract these amounts from your California income to the extent you included them in your federal gross income". But ...

I just went to Target. They had the Deluxe + State for $34.99 in the store (card key). I told them at checkout that Newegg had it for 19.99 and they price matched it for me. So good price, and no waiting.

In all seriousness, I totally get what you're saying and agree with you that you can get more by waiting, but I'm just saying that IF you are filing early, then you can choose a completely arbitrary date, so whether you choose a date a few months before or a few months after your chosen date, it is still arbitrary. In other words, you have ALREADY chosen not to maximize your benefit since you are filing early. So with all those pieces in place, and given a choice of a little more or a little less (not a lot more since like I said you have already made that decision) then why not go the simple route. But again, you are correct that waiting a few months will get you a little more. I think this conversation in general helps people to wrap thei...

I would say that when I am in the heat of battle with a bureaucrat call-taker, that perhaps through no fault of their own, is completely useless, completely uncaring, and so infuriating that you just want to cry, that in that instance I would say I would have spent about $250,000 to avoid it !!!!!

Yes, mathematically that is true. But if you take that a step further into March, or a step further into April, etc. you of course get bigger benefits. Logically you could just say wait until 70. But the argument for taking it in January is "IF you are going to take early" then simplify your life and make it in January. If waiting on delayed credits for a year or two and hoping they get it right and hoping you don't have to go back and figure it out down the road, or if you die hoping the widow will get the delayed credits when she should etc., then any month will work. I mean the fact that we are all on this board discussing this rather than just calling Social Security and asking them says a lot. I think we all agree that we're ...

OP here. I have read and re-read all the posts here, and understand the various views pretty well. But I'm still kind of struggling with this particular aspect - the overlap period where there will be two social security incomes. What I mean is that right now the wife is collecting, so one income. If I collect at 70, then at that point we would have two social security incomes. If I died shortly after, she would revert back to one income a little higher than her original, but back to only one. Now if I filed early, say at 65, and died in my early 70's, we would have collected two income streams for 7 years. In my mind, that's a lot of years in the bank (whether spent or saved it is available). So that's the issue for me, not comparing the h...

OP here, thanks for the replies, it is very helpful. I had another question, but decided to make a new post. It is titled Social Security Claiming Age For Couples, if anyone is interested. Thanks.

I have been thinking about when to file for social security. My wife is already claiming, she started early. My benefit would be a little higher than hers. Now, I know all about survivor's benefits, and that delaying mine would increase her widow benefit etc. This question has a little different twist though. Let's say that you wait until 70, then die a couple years later. The widow would get a higher benefit, sure, but if you filed at 66 for example, you would have collected 4 years worth. So if my FRA amount was 20,000 per year, would the widow be better off with 80,000 in cash and a lower widow benefit? Does this end up just being a breakeven analysis like you would do filing with yourself in mind, or is there something else to consider ...

Right, that's what I was getting at. While I have read the same as you have about the remaining credits being applied the following January, I have also read that it could even be the January after that. So you might wait two years for the remaining credits to kick in. Who needs to be thinking about keeping track of this crap for two years? I'm for keeping it simple and just filing in January. Oh, and as you know but just to repeat - if you wait until 70, the calculation is done then with all credits applied and no waiting.

What I am trying to do is time the late start so that all DRC's are captured at once. Like I mentioned, if you file after FRA and have built a few months of delayed credits, then file in December for example, you will NOT see the delayed credits on your checks for at least another 12 months. This is because SS only calculates your credits each January. So if you file after FRA, but in the very next January, you will capture all of those credits for that prior year in which your FRA fell. I am interested in this because otherwise you will eventually get the remaining credits but not until at least another year. I would rather just know what I'm getting and not have to follow up on it for another year or two. Also, if I die my widow would not...

JoeRetire, I understand what you're saying about how to specify the month. I guess I should have asked it better, what I want to know is not how to specify a month, but what month in particular to specify if I want to capture all of the delayed credits without them rolling over to a future January. From everything I've read, if you file after FRA, then SS calculates your credits for the year and applies them in January. That's why I was trying to be specific on the month to specify. Thanks.

I understand how the delayed retirement credits are applied in January the year following the year they are earned. And I understand that if you file after FRA in any month other than January some of the credits will be delayed. I get all of that. But here's the question: does that mean you could apply say in December to make January the effective month, then start receiving in February? I know this is splitting hairs, but if I want to avoid those timing delays I don't want to screw it up by a month.

Got it. That was very helpful. I will keep watching this post and learning.

That's what I was hoping. In a case like that, I guess the difference in the issue price and the secondary market price would be the cap gain or loss for the broker, not the buyer. I was somehow thinking the whole chain of events ended up in my lap, but all I should be concerned with is the profit (interest) I made. And I guess if I were to sell a T-Bill before maturity, I would deal with the gain or loss, but not the next buyer. I'm just repeating back to see if I'm wrapping my head around this right. Thanks.

Excellent topic. If a T-Bill is purchased in the secondary market from a broker, the price paid to the broker will be either more or less than the price the Bill was originally issued at. So, aside from paying tax on the interest income at maturity, does the price difference in what you paid the broker and the original issue price become a cap gain or loss? For example, let's say a T-Bill was sold at auction for 97.50, the "interest" would be 2.50. But if I paid 98.00 for that Bill from a broker, I would still get 100.00 at maturity, so my "interest" would be 2.00. So do I then have a cap loss of 0.50? Or, is all of this accounted for on the broker's end, and all I have to worry about is the price to the broker?.