A real life case of confused claiming strategies

When to use 'file and suspend' vs. a restricted claim for spousal benefits.
SEP 26, 2013
I continue to receive questions from advisers following my Aug. 20 Social Security boot camp webcast. This is an excellent query from John, a financial adviser in Eugene, Ore., that succinctly summarizes the confusion related to claiming strategies for married couples. He wrote to me about a case he is working on where his client, Don, 71, is retired and receives Social Security retirement benefits of $1,729 per month. Don's wife, Cathy, is 66 — her full retirement age — and about to retire. Her full retirement age benefit is about $1,500 a month. John said that the couple can afford to delay her Social Security benefit until age 70 to maximize her benefit. Remember, retirement benefits increase by 8% a year for every year an individual postpones collecting them up until 70. At that point, they would be worth 132% of Cathy's full retirement age benefit — about $1,980 per month — plus any intervening cost-of-living adjustments. John asked whether Cathy should “file and suspend” so that Don could collect spousal benefits based on her earnings record. As I told John, that strategy won't work because Don is already claiming his own retirement benefits. Don doesn't get a second bite at the Social Security apple. Plus, the file-and-suspend strategy is normally used to trigger spousal benefits. As Don is already collecting his own benefits, which are larger than any spousal benefits he would receive on Cathy's record, that doesn't make sense. However, there is a better way to maximize the couple's Social Security income. Cathy, who has reached full retirement age and who hasn't yet filed for her own Social Security benefits, could file a restricted claim for spousal benefits. That would allow her to collect half her husband's full retirement age benefit — about $860 per month — for the next four years and switch to her own larger benefit of about $1,980 per month when she turns 70. By delaying her retirement benefit until it is worth the maximum amount, Cathy would also secure the largest survivor benefit for Don if she died first because her retirement benefit is larger than his. Survivor benefits are worth 100% of what the worker received or was entitled to receive at the time of death, including any delayed retirement credits, if collected at full retirement age or later. And if Don dies first, Cathy would keep her own larger benefit. At that point, his smaller benefit would disappear.

Latest News

Texas man says SEC and fund could make him pay twice
Texas man says SEC and fund could make him pay twice

A $141M judgment and a federal asset freeze collide over one shrinking pool

Osaic executives Kristy Britt and Greg Cornick to leave
Osaic executives Kristy Britt and Greg Cornick to leave

The firm's CFO and EVP of Wealth Management Solutions are the latest executives to exit the broker-dealer.

Estate planning becomes a client retention issue for financial advisors, survey finds
Estate planning becomes a client retention issue for financial advisors, survey finds

Clients are saying they would consider switching advisors if another professional offered estate planning services, according to a new Trust & Will survey.

Candidly adds AI agents for Trump Accounts, workplace benefits
Candidly adds AI agents for Trump Accounts, workplace benefits

CEO Laurel Taylor says the fintech's composable AI stack helps workers optimize dollars across Trump Accounts, 529s, 401(k)s, and other employee benefits.

BMO adds three advisors in Dallas amid Y'all Street wealth boom
BMO adds three advisors in Dallas amid Y'all Street wealth boom

The bank has swiped three private banking veterans from BNY as the city climbs the ranks of America's fastest-growing wealth hubs.

SPONSORED Who builds the income when the pension disappears?

Dan Biagini of American Equity says the steady decline of pensions, longer lifespans and a reset in interest rates are rewriting how advisors build retirement income

SPONSORED Why direct indexing stopped being optional

Direct indexing is on pace to outgrow ETFs and mutual funds. Northern Trust's Ken Lassner explains why the advisors who get it wish they had started sooner.