Social Security Claiming: The Case of the Public Pension

Case Study March 14, 2024 at 03:48 PM
Share & Print

Social security card and money

This is the latest in a series of biweekly articles featuring Social Security claiming case studies drawn from the ALM publication "2024 Social Security & Medicare Facts," by Michael Thomas with support from Jim Blair, a former Social Security administrator, and Marc Kiner, a planning expert with extensive experience in public accounting.

The Scenario: Married, Dual Earnings and Non-Covered Pension Income

Shaun and JoAnn are a married couple about four months apart in age. Shaun is a high earner whose work earnings in the public sector were entirely covered by Social Security. JoAnn, though, has work under both Social Security covered earnings and as a public employee covered under the Public Employees Retirement System. JoAnn's PERS pension is $440 per month.

As explained on the Social Security Administration's website, benefits can be reduced if a person in JoAnn's shoes receives a pension from an employer who wasn't required to withhold Social Security taxes. This reduction, called the "windfall elimination provision," most commonly affects government work or work in other countries.

Under the law, JoAnn's pension from work not covered by Social Security not only will reduce her own Social Security benefit but also any spousal or survivor benefit she may be entitled to receive. Since her non-covered pension is low, the effect is lessened, but it is still an important factor in the claiming process.

Shaun has an actuarially expected death age of 85, while JoAnn is expected to die past age 87. Under the assumed set of conditions, both spouses have a full retirement age of 67, at which time Shaun's full monthly benefit would be $2,510 and JoAnn's would be $790.

What the Numbers Say

According to the authors, Shaun and JoAnn have as many as six potential claiming scenarios to consider. The difference between the most and least optimal approaches equates to about $100,000 in lifetime benefits.

The least effective choice would be for JoAnn to file for her worker benefit at age 62, when she would get a monthly benefit of $556. Shaun would file several months later at age 62, when he would receive a monthly benefit of $1,767. At that time, JoAnn could file for spousal benefits valued at $164, and she would eventually expect to get a widow benefit of $1,547. With this approach, the lifetime benefit for the couple would be $723,277.

A slightly better approach would be for Shaun to again file at age 62 for his worker benefits ($1,767), while JoAnn would wait to file in 2029 at age 67 for her full worker benefits of $790. JoAnn would then file for her full spousal benefit of $245 in January 2029, and she would later become entitled to a widow benefit of $1,547. This approach would deliver about $27,000 in additional lifetime benefits, for a projected total of $750,753.

A bigger jump in benefits of about $55,000 comes from assuming that Shaun waits for his full retirement age in 2029 to file for his worker benefit of $2,510. In this scenario, JoAnn files first for her own worker benefit of $556 at age 62. Later, in May 2029, JoAnn files for her full spousal benefit of $245 at age 67, and she becomes entitled to a widow benefit of $2,290. The total collected in this scenario is $805,164.

Another $20,000 increase in benefits can be achieved if Shaun delays until age 70 to claim his maximum worker benefit of $3,112, allowing JoAnn to file at the same time for her full spousal benefit ($245). Before that time, JoAnn still files for her own worker benefit at age 62, and she eventually becomes entitled to a widow benefit of $2,892. This results in a total projected lifetime benefit for the couple of $828,792.

The Best Approach

According to the authors, the best approach adds almost another $20,000 to the total projection.

Specifically, JoAnn should file in January 2029 for her full worker benefit of $790, while Shaun waits until 2032 to file for his maximum worker benefit of $3,112 at age 70. This allows JoAnn to also file in 2032 for her full spousal benefit of $245, and she eventually becomes entitled to the maximum widow benefit of $2,892.

This set of assumptions results in a projected lifetime benefit of $847,468 — about $100,000 higher than the least-effective claiming strategy.

Word of Caution on Longevity

One important caveat to consider when digesting this and other claiming case studies is the importance of the longevity assumptions being fed in. Generally, longer assumed lifespans will result in analyses that recommend delayed claiming for one or both spouses.

It is also important to consider that the typical financial advisor's clients are going to be wealthier and healthier than the population averages, so it may make sense to plan for lifespans that range into the middle or even late 90s. It is especially important to consider the growing likelihood that at least one member of the couple will live to age 92 or beyond. In such cases, delaying claiming to 70 is likely to increase the overall projected total.

Social Security calculators can easily come up with situations in which one member of a couple taking funds before age 70 adds up to more funds overall, but such results tend to come from assuming lower life expectancies. In a world of rapidly advancing longevity among the top income earners, this could be a big mistake for financial advisors and clients.

Credit: Adobe Stock 

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Related Stories

Resource Center