PDA

View Full Version : Social Security Payback Option Eliminated



Ponce
10th December 2010, 11:50 AM
He who makes the rules always win the game.
================================================== ======


Social Security Payback Option Eliminated.

by Emily Brandon
Thursday, December 9, 2010


Retirees will no longer be able to get an interest-free loan from the Social Security trust fund, the Social Security Administration announced today. Effective on December 8, retirees will not be able to pay back benefits already received in exchange for higher Social Security payments going forward. Here's a look at how the new Social Security rules could impact your checks.


More from USNews.com:

• Retirement Benefits: What to Expect in 2011

• 10 Tips for Retirement Overseas

• Find Your Best Place to Retire


Free Loans Eliminated

Little-known provisions of Social Security law previously allowed individuals to begin payments at age 62, pay back all the benefits received at age 70 without interest, and then reclaim at a higher rate due to delayed claiming. However, this claiming strategy, which is employed primarily by affluent households, costs the federal government and Social Security trust fund money. "The processing of these withdrawal applications is also a poor use of the agency's limited administrative resources in a time of fiscal austerity -- resources that could be better used to serve the millions of Americans who need Social Security's services," says the SSA in a statement. The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College calculated that if all the American workers with enough liquid assets to repay their Social Security benefits utilized this strategy it would cost the system $5.5 billion.

Under the new rules, Social Security beneficiaries may withdraw an application for retirement benefits only within 12 months of their first Social Security payment and are limited to one withdrawal per lifetime. "There is little to be gained by investing benefits for only 12 months," notes the SSA in the rule.

Retroactive Benefit Suspensions Discontinued

Another way Social Security beneficiaries were previously allowed to boost their checks was by suspending benefits already received retroactively, repaying the amount received, and then getting higher checks going forward. The new rules allow retirees to voluntarily suspend benefits only for months in which they did not receive payments. Beneficiaries may also suspend future payments beginning the month after the request is made.

These changes will be applied only to old-age benefit recipients, not survivor and disability beneficiaries. Comments on the new rules will be considered until Feb. 7, 2011. The agency says it will publish a final rule that responds to relevant comments.

http://finance.yahoo.com/focus-retirement/article/111550/social-security-payback-option-eliminated?mod=fidelity-managingwealth&cat=fidelity_2010_managing_wealth

Sparky
10th December 2010, 11:59 AM
This was a good move.

Joe King
10th December 2010, 12:09 PM
Whether it's a good move or not depends upon exactly what they consider to be "affluent".


employed primarily by affluent households

k-os
10th December 2010, 12:10 PM
I am a little surprised that option ever existed.

jbeck57143
10th December 2010, 12:13 PM
I thought there was no Social Security trust fund-Social Security's a tax that goes into the general fund

Joe King
10th December 2010, 12:20 PM
I thought there was no Social Security trust fund-Social Security's a tax that goes into the general fund
It just comes out of the federal budget. Same as all SS payments do.

Sparky
10th December 2010, 01:10 PM
Whether it's a good move or not depends upon exactly what they consider to be "affluent".


employed primarily by affluent households



No, it's a good move to eliminate it no matter what, because it was a ridiculous provision in the first place. Basically it allowed you to start collecting for several years, invest the money, stop collecting, pay back the principal, and then start collecting again at a higher monthly rate. WTF is that all about?

Sparky
10th December 2010, 01:11 PM
I am a little surprised that option ever existed.


Exactly. It's ridiculous.

I'm starting to think our lawmakers don't know what their doing, or perhaps are operating in their own personal interest.

Now, where's that sarcasm emoticon. Ah, here it is. :sarc:

Joe King
10th December 2010, 01:20 PM
Whether it's a good move or not depends upon exactly what they consider to be "affluent".


employed primarily by affluent households



No, it's a good move to eliminate it no matter what, because it was a ridiculous provision in the first place. Basically it allowed you to start collecting for several years, invest the money, stop collecting, pay back the principal, and then start collecting again at a higher monthly rate. WTF is that all about?


What that provision did was to keep up appearences that, one, there's actually "money" there, and two, that it's actually yours. lol

AFAIC, as long as the "money" is paid back, it's six of one half dozen of the other.

The real reason they're ending it is because that "money" comes straight off the top of the federal budget {same as all SS payments} and and they are looking to shift that spending elsewhere.

madfranks
10th December 2010, 01:56 PM
No, it's a good move to eliminate it no matter what, because it was a ridiculous provision in the first place. Basically it allowed you to start collecting for several years, invest the money, stop collecting, pay back the principal, and then start collecting again at a higher monthly rate. WTF is that all about?



Chalk it up to general bureaucratic incompetence. Just one example among many.

Ponce
10th December 2010, 03:23 PM
And the deeper that the government goes into the debt hole the more new rules that you will see.....all of it "for your convinience".

Twisted Titan
11th December 2010, 02:27 AM
The processing of these withdrawal applications is also a poor use of the agency's limited administrative resources in a time of fiscal austerity


Fiscal Austerity???

Wake me up when SAVAGE AUSTERITY comes to American shores.

T

Glass
11th December 2010, 03:16 AM
That word "austerity" is now appearing everywhere. Another example of deferring costs into the future. Not a bad option perhaps. Kicking the can down the road to manage cashflow.

I think the claiming benefits at a higher rate might be a red herring related to increased cost of living adjustments which I believe have been suspended for a couple of years now. If you started before CoL ajustments ceased you might come back on a higher payment but anyone who did this during years when it was suspended would not.

I'd be surprised if the SS pension plan didn't have a lump sum option buried somewhere in it's code.

Gaillo
11th December 2010, 03:23 AM
Austerity? WTF??? What happened to fvcking "green shoots"? Aren't we on the way to "recovery"?
Oh yeah... short memories and all that. It HAS been all of what... 6 months now? Sure - time for the latest buzzword - Austerity sounds better than broke-ass poverty, after all! ::)

WAKE THE FVCK UP, AMERICA - you are being LIED to and your future is being STOLEN! >:(

iOWNme
11th December 2010, 06:57 AM
SOCIALISM.

It is a disease that erodes any society that attempts it. History told us this 3000+ years ago.

But, luckily the Aristocrats will fix it for us, with another fiat bandaid.


Please by all means, can someone here point to a country/society that has made Socialism a viable option, while protecting the Liberty of the individual?

" You cannot be fed by another and be free from that other. "


Liberty or Security. Take your pick, but it cant be both.

Still Barbaro
11th December 2010, 09:01 AM
WAKE THE FVCK UP, AMERICA - you are LIED to and your future is being STOLEN! >:(


Correction:

WAKE THE FVCK UP, AMERICA - you wereLIED to and your future wasSTOLEN!

Wake up? More and more people are.

But the masses are concerned with keeping or finding a job, the new flat-screen TV, and maybe a shoddy item at Target, Wal-mart, etc.

A reaaaal biiiig treat, is being able to afford a sporting even where they can drink a few beers, and have a night out on the town.