I’ve received more than a few emails recently from folks who are trying to employ the one remaining Social Security maximizing strategy, known as “file and restrict.” These emails demonstrate to me something I’ve long suspected: Employees of the Social Security Administration do a bang-up job when it comes to doing routine matters, such as filing a simple Social Security retirement claim. But when things get a little complex, sadly, more than a few SSA agents fall down on the job, and sometimes even mislead people. Here are some examples.
Q: I just turned 66. I am still working and plan to work indefinitely. I want to suspend my own benefits until age 70 and file for spousal benefits on my ex-husband’s record. He is 68 and getting his Social Security already. We were married for 30 years and have been divorced for 10 years. I never remarried.
I called Social Security’s 800 number. The agent told me that I cannot file and suspend. She said that filing strategy was eliminated by Congress. I told her that according to your column, I still could do this. She said: “Who are you going to believe? Me? Or a newspaper columnist?”
She told me my only option was to file for my own retirement benefits. I told her I didn’t want to do that. She said there was nothing else I could do and hung up. What should I do?
A: You should call them back and hope you get a more knowledgeable telephone rep! But when you call back, I’m going to recommend that you use different terminology. If you used the same language with the phone clerk as you did in your email to me, I can partly understand the confusion.
You said you want to “suspend” your benefits. Technically, that is not what you want to do. That probably implied to the Social Security agent that you wanted to file for your own Social Security benefits and then immediately suspend them. There are several reasons, not necessary to explain here, why people used to do that. But the ability to use that “file and suspend” strategy ended on April 30.
What you want to do is called “file and restrict.” Or to use more precise government-ese, you want to file for benefits, but restrict the scope of your application to spousal benefits only. Near-term retirees still have four more years to implement this file and restrict strategy.
I know this may all sound like just silly jargon, but I’m pretty sure your use of the “file and suspend” language threw off the agent you were talking to. Still, she should have figured out what you wanted to do and been able to take care of you. So call them back, use the right wording and hope you get a telephone rep who knows what he or she is doing.
Q: I am about to turn 66. I want to file and restrict, taking benefits on my husband’s record and saving my own until age 70. I went to the Social Security office to do this. I brought along one of your past columns and showed it to the clerk who was taking care of us. I explained precisely what I wanted to do. He said that because my own benefit was more than half of my husband’s record, I could not take benefits on his account. I continued to press him on this. He spent about 15 minutes looking things up on his computer and eventually told me I simply could not do it.
When I persisted even further, he finally went to talk to a supervisor. When he came back, he said I was right after all and proceeded to take my spousal claim. He said he had worked for SSA for 10 years and that my situation was very unusual and that he had never encountered anything like it.
A: I sure am glad you were so persistent. And unlike the person who sent in the first question I used in this column, you used all the right terminology.
I am really surprised that someone who has worked for SSA for 10 years had never heard of this practice. It has been all the rage among people pushing age 66 for years now.
But it’s just further evidence of the point I made at the beginning of this column. SSA gets high marks for doing routine Social Security business very well. But if the emails to my column are any indication, a lot of their representatives get a failing grade when it comes to these more-complex situations.
So let that be a lesson to other readers of this column. If you are trying to do something that you know is a legitimate transaction, and the clerk that was assigned to you seems puzzled or confused, ask to speak to a supervisor.
Q: I’m very concerned about the timing to apply for my Social Security benefits. I will be 66 in September. I want to make sure I get my full benefit. I do not want to accept any reduced retirement checks. I went to a Social Security office this week. But I am afraid that if I apply for benefits now, they will set me up with reduced retirement to start this month. The Social Security clerk I talked to said there would be no problem and that he would set things up to begin in September. I didn’t trust him and walked out. Now I plan to wait. But on the other hand, I’m worried that if I wait until September, that it might be too late. What should I do?
A: You are overthinking and worrying too much about this. And this is a good example of a simple situation that SSA does very well — meaning the Social Security rep was advising you correctly. You should apply for your Social Security retirement benefits a couple months before you want them to begin.
In other words, doing so now is just fine. As part of the application process, they are going to ask you when you want your benefits to start.
As long as you answer “September” (the month you turn 66) you will be just fine. So you can go back to your Social Security office and file your claim. Or you can apply for your Social Security benefits online at www.socialsecurity.gov
