Getting Your Financial Ducks In A Row Rotating Header Image

reader questions

Disability Benefits at Retirement Age

Here’s a unique situation that I had never come across: what options do you have available to you when you’ve been receiving Social Security disability payments – and you’re nearing Full Retirement Age (FRA)?  A reader recently asked this question as she and her husband are facing decisions with just such a situation…

Retirement home in Zagórz
Image via Wikipedia

Disability Benefits at Retirement Age

As you reach FRA, your Social Security Disability Benefit will automatically convert over to a Retirement Benefit, at the same amount.

What does this mean?  Essentially, once you reach FRA, since you’re now on a Retirement Benefit, you have all of the features available to you as if you had not received any benefit prior to this point and you’re now retired.  So your spouse can collect Spousal Benefits based on your Primary Insurance Amount; Survivor Benefits are also available; and you can choose to Suspend your benefits at FRA (no need to File before suspending, you have effectively filed when your Disability Benefit converted to Retirement Benefits).

By Suspending, you can earn Delayed Retirement Credits (DRCs) of roughly 8% per year up to age 70, which will permanently increase your own benefit and your spouse’s potential future Survivor Benefit.

Obviously, there is no requirement for you to change anything at all once you reach FRA – you can continue receiving the Retirement Benefit the same as you have been receiving the Disability Benefit up to this point.

It’s an unusual situation, understandably, but something to keep in mind if you happen to be facing this circumstance.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Social Security vs. Saving

bank safe combination by Todd Ehlers I received a question from a reader that sort of dovetails with the post from last week about payback from Social Security, so I thought I’d run through the numbers on his question here.  As you may have noticed, I never met a spreadsheet I didn’t like!

Here’s the question from the reader, verbatim:

started work at age 20 retire at age 70.

Over 50 years of work I average $50,000 a year.

If I put 10% of my income away every month from age 20 to age 70 how would I come out versus depending on the government social security checks I would receive after retirement.

Initial Reaction

My initial reaction to this question was that you’d be much better off with the savings option, since you’re saving at a much greater rate (10%) than the withholding, and for fifteen more years than the Social Security system takes into account.  However, that’s not altogether correct, since the Social Security system includes both your withholding and your employer’s withholding, for a rate in 2010 of 12.4%.  But this rate is much lower in the earlier years of the calculations. So let’s go ahead and run the numbers.

Assumptions

There are a few assumptions that we have to make in order to complete this problem:

  • In order to come up with an average of $50,000 per year, I first looked at the maximum Social Security withholding.  By calculating the average from 1961 to 2010, we come up with an average of $43,804.  This is a little less than the average that the reader suggested, but it will work for our purposes and keep the calculations a bit simpler.
  • Putting aside 10% each year requires that we come up with a rate of return for this investment account.  I used a simple 5% return, which is reasonable over that period of time.
  • I assumed that the side account is an IRA or a 401(k), so taxes have not been factored into the equations.

Calculations

As we saw in the previous post, earning the Social Security maximum over the final 35 years of your working career will give you a monthly benefit of $3,204 in 2011.

Saving 10% of your earnings (using the maximum Social Security wage base) over 50 years at 5% will bring you to a total in your IRA or 401(k) of $443,969.  Unfortunately, just running a few simple quotes from single premium annuity websites indicates that a joint and survivor annuity paying a $3,200 monthly payment will cost a total of $584,830 or $610,909 depending on the website you choose.  And that’s a fixed payment, not a COLA-adjusted payment like your Social Security benefit is.

However, upon the death of both you and your spouse, there is nothing left over – so the question becomes one of longevity.  If you both live long, full lives, the Social Security option works out much better.  If you and your spouse die earlier, any time before about age 85, there will be something left over for your heirs in the savings option.

Of course, the Social Security benefit could be taxed, up to 85% depending upon your other income.  Since the savings option is in a qualified account or an IRA, 100% of the disbursements will be taxed.  If it was a non-qualified account, just a regular savings or investment account, the taxation would be considerably less.

Conclusion

In the end result, it seems that the Social Security benefit option is a pretty good deal, especially since we all hope to live a long, full life.  The savings option works better if you die earlier than (roughly) age 85, providing a residual amount to your heirs.  This is a little different from what I’d originally thought, but when you consider that the average life expectancy of a male age 70 is roughly 84 (86 for females), there’s a high probability that you won’t outlive your savings, although there’s a similarly high probability that you will outlive your savings.

And finally, since you don’t really have a choice in the matter, the entire question is really moot – but an interesting exercise, nonetheless.

Photo by Todd Ehlers

What to do with a Year-End Bonus

llamas by ChipThis article originated from a reader question…

For example, suppose I get, say, a $5000 bonus before the end of the year, would I be better off giving it away or putting it in 401k to avoid tax consequences, putting some in Roth IRA (if I still qualify), paying the tax bill on a conversion of some rollover IRA $$ to a Roth, paying my child’s tuition bill (too late for 529 now) to avoid debt, or replacing the 10-year old heating and A/C system to lower ongoing utility costs?

The specifics of this question are unique to the individual who asked the question, but the reasoning behind the response can be tailored to fit many other circumstances.  What follows is an example of the process that I typically go through to assist folks in the process of understanding the impacts of various choices…

Assumptions

To start off, we need to make some assumptions about the situation that will guide us through the process.  The reader who posted the question leaves us with a few clues that help us understand his tax situation – he’s made reference to income level with the “if I still qualify” parenthetical comment, so we should assume that the tax bracket for the bonus money is relatively high, close to the limit for Roth IRA contributions, which for 2010 is the 28% bracket.  In addition to the marginal tax rate, we’ll assume that the asker is married, filing taxes jointly.  We’ll also assume that the asker’s spouse is already contributing to a retirement plan (so a Spousal IRA contribution is not in play).  So in all cases the net after-tax bonus is assumed to be $3,600 (28% or $1,400 is withheld).

We also assume that in retirement, the tax bracket will be lower than it is currently, making tax deferral today more beneficial – meaning that we want to pay as little tax as we can today if we can pay tax on that income tomorrow.

Other assumptions include:  the asker of the question has not maximized his contributions for the year to a 401(k), or a Roth IRA; the child (student) has not exhausted his student loan options, and funds can be borrowed at an unsubsidized rate of 6.8%; plus, the cost of purchasing a new heating and A/C system for the home in question is $7,000; and lastly, there are funds available to pay for the needed heating and A/C unit or the tuition bill (if a loan is not used).

Analysis (*2010 tax provisions in use)

Donating – This would give you a tax deduction, so it would reduce your overall tax by $1,008.

Contribute to 401(k) – In this case, given the relatively high tax bracket, there would be a tax reduction (from all other options) of $1,400, allowing you to put the entire $5,000 to work in the retirement account.  The assumption here includes the fact that you expect your tax bracket to be lower in retirement than it is presently – since when you take the money out of the 401(k), it’ll be taxed as ordinary income, thereby reducing the benefit of this tax reduction today.

Roth IRA contribution – If the asker of the question has not made his Roth IRA maximum contribution for the year and all other tax reduction and deferral options have been exhausted, this might make a great deal of sense.  However, since there are other alternatives to look at, the Roth IRA contribution might not be the best option to use in these circumstances – since the tax cost of the money is relatively high.

Paying the tax on a Roth IRA conversion – Again, given the tax bracket involved here, a Roth IRA conversion is probably not a good idea.  This amount of $3,600 could pay the tax for up to $12,850 of Roth Conversion, but as we have discussed in other articles, at the 28% bracket this is a somewhat costly conversion.  It is assumed that in retirement your tax bracket would be less than the 28% current bracket – so only a very long period of deferral in the Roth account would prove beneficial.

Paying your child’s tuition – Paying the tuition bill could be a good use of these funds, because you would likely be eligible to use the American Opportunity Tax Credit on the tuition payment, giving you a credit of up to $2,500 directly against your overall tax, although the amount attributable to the net $3,600 would be $2,400 at most.  This would eliminate the tax on the bonus altogether and give you an additional $1,000 in tax credit.

Replacing the aging heating and A/C – A 30% tax credit is available on the purchase price of eligible Qualified Residential Energy Property, up to $1,500.  The cost of the installation is not allowable for the credit, this would be added to the basis of the property.  For the net $3,600 from the bonus, the credit would be $1,080.  In addition, assuming that the current system in place is far less efficient than a new system, this might equate to as much as an annual reduction of $200 or so in your annual heating and cooling costs.

Putting it all together…

Now that we’ve looked at the tax benefits of the options available, let’s compare them all side-by-side:

Donation – $1,008 tax reduction

401(k) – $1,400 tax deferred

Roth Contribution or Conversion – no current tax benefit

Tuition – $2,400 tax credit

Heating & A/C – $1,080 tax credit, plus ongoing $200 reduction in heating/cooling costs

So – the best route to go with this bonus, purely from a tax benefit standpoint, is paying the tuition bill.  This would give you all of the withheld tax back, plus an additional $1,000 in tax credits.  However, if you already have other funds set aside to use to pay the tuition, you might use those instead, and then use the bonus for one of the other options.  (It should also be noted here that, if you haven’t taken advantage of your employer matching contributions in your 401(k), that would be the best possible place to use the bonus money.)

In the case of the heating and A/C system – this is a matter of priority… if the system truly needs replacing (beginning to show signs of failing), then you might put it higher in the priority order above the tuition or the 401(k) plan.  For example, the student or the parent could get unsubsidized loans to pay for the tuition bill, since the interest on these loans can be deducted from taxes in the future, and then use the bonus (and the tax credit) to pay for the heating and A/C system.

Other options that you might consider for these funds would be: pay down high interest debt (credit cards, auto loans, or student loans), spend it on your own education (a master’s degree could make a significant difference in your future income), improve your “emergency” fund, or consider starting your own small side business.  You could also use a portion of your funds to treat yourself and your family to a vacation, or perhaps some other leisure pursuit that will improve your life or provide other intangible benefits.

Of course, all of these options require you to put your own priority system to work.  We’ve covered the tax implications – now it’s up to you to decide what makes the most sense for you.  If it is of a high priority for you to make donations to a charity of importance to you, this might be the best option for you.

Photo by Chip

078-05-1120 – is this Your Number?

Hopefully it’s not what you think is your Social Security number, although it’s quite possible that at some point you (or someone you know) did think it was.  Why is that?  It’s a very interesting story (with thanks to the Social Security Administration for the story):

The story of the most misused number of all time. . .

The most misused SSN of all time was (078-05-1120). In 1938, wallet manufacturer the E. H. Ferree company in Lockport, New York decided to promote its product by showing how a Social Security card would fit into its wallets. A sample card, used for display purposes, was inserted in each wallet. Company Vice President and Treasurer Douglas Patterson thought it would be a clever idea to use the actual SSN of his secretary, Mrs. Hilda Schrader Whitcher.

The wallet was sold by Woolworth stores and other department stores all over the country. Even though the card was only half the size of a real card, was printed all in red, and had the word “specimen” written across the face, many purchasers of the wallet adopted the SSN as their own. In the peak year of 1943, 5,755 people were using Hilda’s number. SSA acted to eliminate the problem by voiding the number and publicizing that it was incorrect to use it. (Mrs. Whitcher was given a new number.) However, the number continued to be used for many years. In all, over 40,000 people reported this as their SSN. As late as 1977, 12 people were found to still be using the SSN “issued by Woolworth.”

Mrs. Whitcher recalled coming back from lunch one day to find her fellow workers teasing her about her new-found fame. They were singing the refrain from a popular song of the day: “Here comes the million-dollar baby from the five and ten cent store.”

Although the snafu gave her a measure of fame, it was mostly a nuisance. The FBI even showed up at her door to ask her about the widespread use of her number. In later years she observed: “They started using the number. They thought it was their own. I can’t understand how people can be so stupid. I can’t understand that.”

Mrs. Whitcher

Mrs. Whitcher compares the Social Security card “issued by Woolworth” with her own real card of the same number.

Woolworth  Social Security card

The card that started all the fuss!

Not The Only One

The New York wallet manufacturer was not the only one to cause confusion about Social Security numbers. More than a dozen similar cases have occurred over the years–usually when someone publishes a facsimile of an SSN using a made-up number. (The Whitcher case is far and away the worst involving a real SSN and an actual person.)

One embarrassing episode was the fault of the Social Security Board itself. In 1940 the Board published a pamphlet explaining the new program and showing a facsimile of a card on the cover. The card in the illustration used a made-up number of 219-09-9999. Sure enough, in 1962 a woman presented herself to the Provo, Utah Social Security office complaining that her new employer was refusing to accept her old Social Security number–219-09-9999. When it was explained that this could not possibly be her number, she whipped out her copy of the 1940 pamphlet to prove that yes indeed it was her number!

Lifelock

Then there’s the story of Lifelock, the identity-fraud protection company.  The CEO of the company proudly proclaimed that his company’s protection was so good that he could publish his own Social Security number, 457-55-5462, and have no fear of identity theft.

You guessed it, this number has been used countless times by potential fraud perpetrators, apparently 13 of which have been successful in their endeavors, according to some reports.

Your Turn!

reichel_1893_2Over the course of the past 6+ years, I’ve blathered on and on at this blog, pretty much based upon what I wanted to share with all of you, dear readers.  I’ve based some of the topics on what I hear from my clients, and other topics just based on what I found interesting about the primary areas that I cover:  IRAs, income taxes, and Social Security.  But now it’s your turn.

I haven’t run out of topics to write about – I can go on forever, believe me.  I just want to hear from you, the readers of this blog, as to what topics you’d like me to cover.  It might be an area that I haven’t touched on at all, or maybe it’s a new take on a topic that I’ve already written about.  Don’t be afraid to hit me up with whatever ideas, questions, or situations you have.  It’s up to you to help me out with new ideas to write about so that Getting Your Financial Ducks In A Row is as useful and valuable to you as possible.

So – give me your suggestions.  You can use any of the communication methods available, leave a comment, or use the communication form (on the right), or just send me an email (also over on the right).  If you’re reading this through an RSS feed, you’ll need to visit the blog proper in order to get at these communication methods (try clicking on the title of the post in your reader, that should take you to the native blog, or click on this link – Getting Your Financial Ducks In A Row).

Photo by Rugby Pioneer

The Earnings Test is Specific to the Individual

all thats left by adonis hunter  ahpticalAs I’ve mentioned before, I often receive questions from readers that include topics that may be of general interest to my reading community.  When this happens, I will post the question and my answer to that question, with the names omitted and some details changed to protect identity.

Note:  you can send in your own question, too. Just go to the submission form along the right side of this page, under the heading “Not Finding Your Answer?”.  It’s painless and simple – and as long as your question isn’t too complicated I’ll get a response out to you as soon as possible.  If your question is more complex, I’ll let you know how we can proceed at that point.

This topic comes from a reader, J., who asks the following question:

My wife is 62 and she works a part-time job earning around $23k per year.  She is planning to retire in June, and so her total earnings for the year will be approximately $11,500.  She would like to begin taking Social Security benefits right after her retirement.

The question is this:  will her earnings test be based upon her “individual” earnings, or on the higher combined earnings of the two of us (I am still working, earning in excess of the earnings test amount)?  Since her earnings of approximately $11,500 are under the $14,160 earnings limit, her earnings would not be reduced – but if the earnings test is based upon both of our earnings combined, her earnings would definitely be reduced.  How does this work?

My Response

Each person’s earnings record is specific to that individual – the only time the spouse enters into the equation is in calculating spousal or survivor’s benefits.  Therefore, the only earnings considered for the “earnings test” for your wife – are those of your wife, and not the household (not including your income, in other words).  Actually one other time that the household earnings are considered is when you file your tax return:  at your household income level, her benefit will be taxable at the 85% amount.

In addition, there is a special rule that applies to the first year of retirement, when a person retires mid-year:  the retiree who retires in mid-year is eligible for a full benefit (however reduced by age, in your wife’s case) for any whole month that the person is considered retired, regardless of total yearly earnings.

“Considered retired” when at less than Full Retirement Age is defined as having earned $1,180 or less and not performing substantial services in self-employment.  “Substantial services in self-employment” is defined as more than 45 hours per month in a business or more than 15 hours to a business in a highly skilled occupation (e.g., brain surgery or writing a blog about Social Security and financial planning).

So, with this in mind, your wife would be eligible for her age-reduced benefit for the remainder of the year after her retirement, with no reductions due to earnings tests (as long as she doesn’t pick up another job).

Photo by adonis hunter / ahptical

Why NOT max out 401(k)?

Question:

I don’t understand why I wouldn’t max my pre-tax contribution to my employers 401(k) and put any other funds into Roth IRA (if I can afford anymore). Right now I am contributing 6%, employer matches first 3% (cheap @#$). My wife’s is about the same. I have around $42k and she has $39k. (32 and 31 years old).I put about $300 a month into our Roths ($150 each). Wouldn’t I be better off just bumping up the % and then any bonus money into a Roth? The only complaint I have about my 401k is that the choices are limited (I work for a bank so I’m stuck with our funds). My wife (who works for a different bank) as some great choices. Maybe I just don’t understand the tax consequences. Roth taxed on contributions now but gains are not taxed later. 401k, not taxed now but EVERYTHING is taxed later. Is this accurate? Please advise.Thank you.

My Response:

The non-taxation of the growth in the Roth account is probably the greatest benefit. A secondary benefit of the Roth account is that these accounts do not have Required Minimum Distributions at age 70 1/2 as do trad IRA and qualified plans (such as a 401(k)). The third benefit is flexibility, where a Roth account would allow you to access your contributions at any time, for any reason, with no penalty or tax. Not so with the other accounts.Lastly (for this post), as you stated above, many times your choices in a 401(k) plan are limited. A Roth IRA account doesn’t have these limitations.