How couples can get the most out of Social Security © Siri Stafford / Photodisc Red / Getty Images

The Basics

3 ways to maximize Social Security

Married couples who retire might benefit from some professional assistance in choosing the strategy that is likely to yield the most money.

By U.S. News & World Report

It has become a cliché to say that the work-life balance of average Americans has changed substantially and that many couples plan to work well beyond what has been traditionally defined as the "retirement years."

It's important to remember that the decision to work longer can come even after a few years of retirement and can affect married couples in a variety of ways.

Certain individuals may initially choose to retire, only to re-enter the work force for a variety of reasons -- ranging from boredom to necessity -- a few years later, and continue to work for an indeterminate period of time. Some married couples may have one spouse continue to have a career well into the traditional retirement years, while the other may leave the working world permanently.

It is important for retirees and pre-retirees who want to do smart financial planning for the future to think about how to best maximize Social Security for such scenarios, which are not only increasingly possible but probable for many.

The first step is to begin thinking of Social Security payments as an asset. Consider Social Security a guaranteed annuity that all legally employed citizens own, which will ultimately provide one of the most-secure income streams possible in your investment portfolio.

Given this context, what are some possible strategies to maximize Social Security income returns for individuals and married couples who fall under the above circumstances?

1. The "Social Security do-over." This strategy is geared toward individuals who have started to take Social Security benefits early but wind up working again.

Individuals who began collecting Social Security benefits early -- at age 62 -- and who re-enter the work force at some point afterward can stop receiving payments until age 70. What's the upside? When this individual truly retires again, Social Security benefits will have increased proportionately based on his or her earnings.

What are the key caveats? First, a "do-over strategy" will require the individual to pay back all Social Security income previously received. Those considering this strategy must be certain that they have the savings set aside to pay it back as well as very detailed tax records on the amount of tax already paid to the IRS on those received benefits. If taxes have been paid, a tax credit or deduction may be available.

Equally important: If spouses decide to take advantage of this strategy, they should be in good health and have longevity on their side. One of the biggest risks of this strategy is if both spouses die shortly after paying back their benefits, the money that they paid back to Uncle Sam is lost as far as heirs are concerned. However, if just one spouse pays back the benefits and dies shortly after, the surviving spouse can still collect the spousal benefits.

This strategy is easier to execute than you might think. Anyone older than 62 and younger than 70 who is already receiving benefits can start by filing a Request for Withdrawal of Application (.pdf file).

2. The "file and suspend" approach. The second possible strategy is geared only toward couples in which one spouse is the breadwinner, and who have sufficient assets or sources of income so that only one set of Social Security benefits is needed.

This is how it might work: A husband who has worked until Social Security qualifying age files for benefits while the wife, who has stopped working well before the qualifying age, files for spousal benefits. The husband then requests from the Social Security Administration a suspension of benefits while the wife continues to receive her payments. The husband's benefits -- which would be more significant in this hypothetical instance, given his "breadwinner" status -- continue to grow until he decides when to start receiving benefits again. Over the long term, this can create an even greater income stream when a couple is further along the distribution stage of their retirement financial plan.

Continued: Restricting benefits

More from MSN Money and U.S. News & World Report

 1 | 2 | next >

Rate this Article

Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowHigh
U.S. News  on MSN Money
22Comments
12/12/2010 11:36 PM
avatar
If I retire at 62 I'm ahead until I reach the age of 78. Do the math.
11/12/2010 4:37 PM
avatar

My husband receives a govt. pension (small) so all the many years he had social security taken from his other jobs hardly count due to the offset, unless you think $136 is worth counting.  All the $ he "gave" to social security is just lost! 

Can someone please explain the logic?  We want our money back!!

 

 

 

11/11/2010 4:40 PM
avatar
Actually, the best way to maximize social security would be to let me have MY MONEY back, and put it into my 401K to earn interest on it. Social Security is nothing more than a legal pyramid scheme, and we should be able to opt out, providing that we have a legitimate retirement plan in place.
11/10/2010 10:17 AM
avatar
everyone would need to run the numbers for their personal situation, but evidently the 'pay it all back option' is so lucrative for the SS recipient that congress is reportedly going to remove that option.
11/09/2010 7:24 PM
avatar
If Social Security is not "there" when you retire, much of the blame lays on the shoulders of Lydon Johnson and the all subsequent Democrat presidents and Democrat dominated congresses since.  The Democrats wanted to change the horses mid-stream.       They decided to Take & Allocate the monies that was piling up until people became of age to start drawing their retirement,  and use the money for many govt pet projects.  Now that the Baby Boomers are at the age to get SS there is no stock-pile like there should be,   Fed govt needs to just stop using SS funds for the numerous programs and get back to the program as it started out to be..     
11/09/2010 4:39 PM
avatar
In what case do you really think an Illegal could collect social security benefits.  Only those people who pay into the last 40 quarters before retirement age can receive SS benefits.  If you are here illegaly, it would show up by not having a valid SS number or ID!!  You have been watching too many Republican propaganda ads...do some studying and get the fact, MAX!!! Just because they spread these rumors, it does not make them true.
11/09/2010 4:36 PM
avatar
Are you people kidding me - has anyone read this dribble this MSN Money is putting out - Congress and the Senate got over $7500.00 annually added this year, tell me what they did except ruin this country, I don't even get $7500.00 per year and I am supposed to be happy.  These Demis make me sick, to include this so called money advisor.
11/09/2010 4:33 PM
avatar

My husband and I both collect from our own SS because we both worked all our adult years.  Both our SS payments exceed what we would get if we received spousal benefits instead of our own SS.   Don't have to be divorced to get our own SS we paid into.  Not sure where the idea of divorce gives  you more money.  THink that was a law many years ago and has been changed.

 

Also, I believe the statement in this article that says if you go back to work you have to pay back all the money you received from SS is wrong.  If you go back to work, you start paying into SS again, but the benefit of working more quarters is you will receive more SS when you stop working again.  The only thing about SS when you go back to work full time and earn more than the guidelines SS allows you to earn you will not be able to draw SS and work, too.  But, pay back  all the m oney you received while retire?  Where does that come from?

  Maybe the author got this mixed up with you earning more than SS allows you to earn while receiving SS benefits. 

 

Now, if a person wanted to earn a benefit from working longer that matched another person who never stopped working, i guess they could pay back what they received in benefits and up their monthly payment when they again retired...but probably would have to be well off financially to have saved all that money or have it anyway to pay it back.  But this article alludes to anyone who goes back to work MUST repay all the benefits they have earned to SS.  that is either not well written or just wrong.

 

Need a better job of getting facts straight so as to not mislead the public with the Internet article.  This is definitely not from the

SS administration and either is written as an advertisement to sell some annuity or by a REpublican who supports privatizing SS.

 

Reader beware!!

11/09/2010 4:30 PM
avatar
If the baggers privatize SS then Wall Street will walk away with even more profits.  The rest of us will be eating dog food begged from a food bank.  Arf, arf...
11/09/2010 4:27 PM
avatar
Shame on you.  I heard that it is to the government's benefit for people to scam government programs  - and some will actually encourage it.  This is a perfect example of that being more than a theory that it sounds to be true.  Being able to openly explain how to - plus the government turning down IBM's offer (for free) to monitor/catch people committing this type of fraud - and the GOVERNMENT TURNING THEM Down is becoming proof that it might be so.  If you rely on the government to support you in your old age - then you deserve the tiny about they will give you and expect total gratitude in return.  Yuck.  This article turns my stomach.  Come on America - we are educated people - not peasants living in huts and scrounging around.
11/09/2010 4:23 PM
avatar
I have a government pension but paid into SS most of my life. when I reach 62 my benefit is slashed because of my government pension. I had to pay the full amount on wages from my private sector work but when the time comes to collect, sorry bud but the GPO (government pension offset) takes it away or at least most of the benefit. I still work and still have to pay into SS. Some things just aren't right.
11/09/2010 4:16 PM
avatar
I'm expecting social security to be the smallest part of my retirement income and certainly not large enough to forfeit pension survivor benefits under the "let's get divorced before retirement" idea. 
11/09/2010 4:14 PM
avatar
I retired at 62 and then started working again at 63; I had to be careful to not go over the annual limits, but those jerks still collected Social Security out of my wages until I finally retired again at 68. I wasn't making much before I retired at 62 and it was only a low wage job from 63 to 68, but  have those SOB's raised my SS benefits; Don't make me laugh. Considering that I worked for 3 years beyond the normal retirement at 65, they should have increasd me to full benefits.
11/09/2010 4:09 PM
avatar
is this guy kidding?  guaranteed annuity?  the ss system is already upside down, this guy is clueless!
The first step is to begin thinking of Social Security payments as an asset. Consider Social Security a guaranteed annuity that all legally employed citizens own, which will ultimately provide one of the most-secure income streams possible in your investment portfolio.
11/09/2010 4:06 PM
avatar
 This shows as much as ILEGALs are leaching the system , so are the rest of thiose who can and we wonder why its going broke!
11/09/2010 3:39 PM
avatar

 

Wow - sure looks like there are a lot of people out there want to talk us into working until we drop dead - sure lets hold off on taking SS until we are 70 or older - lets see how many will not be around to even collect what they earned!!!!!  That sure seems like the answer to SS problems.

11/09/2010 3:29 PM
avatar
Wait!..... what's in it for me? Argh! Such a small planet we live on and such an abundance of IDIOTS populating it. Why don't you all move to other planets. There's enough planets for everyone to be sole ruler. Earth is mine! Who's next? Eye-rolling
11/09/2010 1:55 PM
avatar

Just remember, unless you are retiring right away (like the next few months), this is all subject to change.  What the government giveth (even if you earned it!), the government taketh away with interest.

11/09/2010 10:13 AM
avatar
This assumes, of course, that Social Security will still be there when I am ready to retire....
11/09/2010 9:22 AM
avatar
I suggest the writer of this article check his facts.  What you are suggesting is partially true.  There is no refund of taxes paid to IRS.  And in most cases A person would have to live to 90 where it was to there advantage to do the do over.  And they have to pay the full amount back within 60 days.  Also the spouse does not get credit for the delayed retirement credits only the worker does so work after full retirement age does not give the spouse extra money only the worker.  You should have called social security before writing this article.  If anyone has questions ask the right people for advise  
Report
Please help us to maintain a healthy and vibrant community by reporting any illegal or inappropriate behavior. If you believe a message violates theCode of ConductPlease use this form to notify the moderators. They will investigate your report and take appropriate action. If necessary, they report all illegal activity to the proper authorities.
Categories
Additional comments(optional)
100 character limit
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
viewCounter