Retirement bottom line: Many will have to work until 70

[steve2470]

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/retirement/story/2012-04-21/cnbc-retirement-blues-for-boomers/54383224/1

Will the old thirtysomething gang still be showing up for work at seventysomething?

That could be the case if they hope to enjoy a financially secure retirement.

Baby Boomers, with their inheritances, homes, and old-fashioned pensions, may appear to be on track for a solid retirement — but some experts say the forecast for the generation born from 1946 through 1964 isn't necessarily so rosy.

While Boomers are more likely than younger workers to have defined-benefit pension plans and certain other advantages — that's particularly true of older Boomers — many may wind up financially ill-prepared for retirement unless they work longer and save more.

[Sancho]

1. I'm already planning to work to 70....

If I'm healthy enough, I don't mind working. What I hate are the crooks and murderers stealing our retirement. All I can think is that we should just limit the military to 20% of GDP. What the hell is going on in this country?

[Yo_Mama]

29. Military costs way less than 20% of GDP - more like 5%.

As of September, 2011 (end of fiscal year), nominal GDP was 15.176 trillion:
http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2012/pdf/gdp4q11_3rd.pdf
Table 3 there.

National defense was 20% of the federal expenditures in 2011:
http://www.fms.treas.gov/annualreport/cs2011/outlay.pdf

That's 708.3 billion, or 4.7% of GDP.

In terms of federal expenditures:
Social Security was 20%, or about the same as national defense. Medicare plus health together was 23%. Income security was 17%. Interest on the federal debt was 6%. Other and education was 14%.

Total federal expenditures (3.598 trillion) were 23.7% of GDP.

[xchrom]

2. I've always thought this was a bad scenario.

It delays other workers moving up.

I understand people might want to work - but that's different than an economic system rigged to make people work past - say 62 or 59.

[RebelOne]

3. I had planned to work past 70,

but I was laid off in January of 2010 right after I turned 71. I was not laid off because of my age, but the company was downsizing, and three others were laid off at the same time who were a lot younger than me. I had hoped to work longer to get more money into my 401K. I was given a very generous severance package for 6 months. And when that ran out, I collected unemployment for a year. Fortunately, I was already collecting social security. So now, I am living solely on social security even though I have a few thousand in the bank. But I am trying not to dip into that because it is going to have to last me for a long, long time.

[MisterP]

4. well, I'm sure that THIS round of voting for neoliberal hacks, Wall Streeters, and yuppies

will cure everything!

[patrice]

5. IF anyone will employ them.

[tularetom]

6. I have two relatives in their mid 60's with no prospects of ever retiring

Both are working at menial jobs just a step or two above minimum wage burger flipping. One never had much of a chance in life and the other was downsized about five years ago and tossed into the job market with an obsolete skill set.

They are both widows with very little in terms of net worth and they are picking up their premiums for medical insurance (Medicare supplement) out of their own pocket.

After expenses neither has much remaining in terms of disposable income.

We've offered to help but I think both of these ladies are actually embarrassed that we are aware of their situation. Which is really the saddest part of the whole story. Why should anyone be ashamed that the world has taken a dump on them?

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

7. That's certainly how John Boehner wants it.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1886260998?bctid=104611069001

[lunatica]

8. You can keep right on working and get social security at 65

I plan to continue working. I was a stay at home mom and when I did work it was part time because my asshole husband demanded that I be at his beck and call, especially for his vacations so I never accrued much social security.

He's now my ex. Has been for about 17 years. Happy years.

[1monster]

12. If you were married to him for more than ten years, you are entitled to a stipend based

on his social security wages even if your are divorced now. Check into it.

[happyslug]

19. It is called the Widow's share" of his SS Survivor's benefit

The Survivor's benefit is a set amount roughly equal to half of his own Social Security amount, which is divided equally among all of his "survivors". i.e. if he has two "Survivors" each get on half of the survivor's total, if five survivors, each get 1/5th of the Survivor amount.

Survivors include any child under 18, any child ruled to be disabled before age 22, any spouse one is married to OR had been married to for ten years of more. Any parent who has a child under age 16 is another "Survivor" as that term in used by Social Security.

One can only claim Survivor's benefits if one's own Social Security is lower (i.e. you get which ever is higher NOT bot).

As to widow's benefit, the widow (or widower) must be over age 60 (or age 50 if disabled, i.e. can no longer work).

Just some guidelines to understand the benefit, I would still make an appilication even if you do NOT think you meet the above, some other regulation may be applicable, so I would advise anyone to make the application and see if one is rejected.

[charlyvi]

20. Actually, it's called a spouse's benefit.

A divorced spouse's benefit in her case. A widow's benefit applies when the worker is deceased.

[happyslug]

21. NOT in the Actual Regulations, 20 CFR § 404.336, listed herein:

We will find you entitled to widow's or widower's benefits as the surviving divorced wife or the surviving divorced husband of a person who died fully insured if you meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section:

(a) You are the insured's surviving divorced wife or surviving divorced husband and you meet both of the conditions in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section:

(1) You were validly married to the insured under State law as described in §404.345 or are deemed to have been validly married as described in §404.346.

(2) You were married to the insured for at least 10 years immediately before your divorce became final.

(b) You apply, except that you need not apply again if you meet one of the conditions in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section:

(1) You are entitled to wife's or husband's benefits for the month before the month in which the insured dies and you have attained full retirement age (as defined in §404.409) or you are not entitled to old-age or disability benefits.

(2) You are entitled to mother's or father's benefits for the month before the month in which you attain full retirement age (as defined in §404.409).

(3) You are entitled to wife's or husband's benefits and to either old-age or disability benefits in the month before the month of the insured's death, you have not attained full retirement age (as defined in §404.409) in the month of death, and you have filed a Certificate of Election in which you elect to receive reduced widow's or widower's benefits.

(4) You applied in 1990 for widow's or widower's benefits based on disability, and you meet the requirements in both paragraphs (b)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section:

(i) You were entitled to disability insurance benefits for December 1990 or eligible for supplemental security income or federally administered State supplementary payments, as specified in subparts B and T of part 416 of this chapter, respectively, for January 1991.

(ii) You were found not disabled for any month based on the definition of disability in §§404.1577 and 404.1578, as in effect prior to January 1991, but would have been entitled if the standard in §404.1505(a) had applied. (This exception to the requirement for filing an application is effective only with respect to benefits payable for months after December 1990.)

(c) You are at least 60 years old; or you are at least 50 years old and have a disability as defined in §404.1505 and you meet all of the conditions in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this section:

(1) Your disability started not later than 7 years after the insured died or 7 years after you were last entitled to mother's or father's benefits or to widow's or widower's benefits based upon a disability, whichever occurred last.

(2) Your disability continued during a waiting period of 5 full consecutive months, unless months beginning with the first month of eligibility for supplemental security income or federally administered State supplementary payments are counted, as explained in the Exception in paragraph (c)(3) of this section. This waiting period may begin no earlier than the 17th month before you applied; the fifth month before the insured died; or if you were previously entitled to mother's, father's, widow's, or widower's benefits, the 5th month before your previous entitlement to benefits ended. If you were previously entitled to widow's or widower's benefits based upon a disability, no waiting period is required.

(3) Exception: For monthly benefits payable for months after December 1990, if you were or have been eligible for supplemental security income or federally administered State supplementary payments, as specified in subparts B and T of part 416 of this chapter, respectively, your disability does not have to have continued through a separate, full 5-month waiting period before you may begin receiving benefits. We will include as months of the 5-month waiting period the months in a period beginning with the first month you received supplemental security income or a federally administered State supplementary payment and continuing through all succeeding months, regardless of whether the months in the period coincide with the months in which your waiting period would have occurred, or whether you continued to be eligible for supplemental security income or a federally administered State supplementary payment after the period began, or whether you met the nondisability requirements for entitlement to widow's or widower's benefits. However, we will not pay you benefits under this provision for any month prior to January 1991.

(4) You have not previously received 36 months of payments based on disability when drug addiction or alcoholism was a contributing factor material to the determination of disability (as described in §404.1535), regardless of the number of entitlement periods you may have had, or your current application for widow's or widower's benefits is not based on a disability where drug addiction or alcoholism is a contributing factor material to the determination of disability.

(d) You are not entitled to an old-age benefit that is equal to or larger than the insured person's primary insurance amount.

(e) You are unmarried, unless for benefits for months after 1983 you meet one of the conditions in paragraphs (e)(1) through (3) of this section:

(1) You remarried after you became 60 years old.

(2) You are now age 60 or older and you meet both of the conditions in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section:

(i) You remarried after attaining age 50 but before attaining age 60.

(ii) At the time of the remarriage, you were entitled to widow's or widower's benefits as a disabled widow or widower.

(3) You are now at least age 50 but not yet age 60 and you meet both of the conditions in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section:

(i) You remarried after attaining age 50.

(ii) You met the disability requirements in paragraph (c) of this section at the time of your remarriage ( i.e., your disability began within the specified time and before your remarriage).

[68 FR 4705, Jan. 30, 2003, as amended at 71 FR 24814, Apr. 27, 2006]

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=efe18501c75e7b09548d9cd033274859&rgn=div8&view=text&node=20:2.0.1.1.5.4.128.24&idno=20

[charlyvi]

22. UM....the woman's ex husband is not dead.

Surviving divorced spouse's benefits cannot be collected from a live ex husband. None of the regs you quote affirm that they can. And your percentages are wrong as well. Auxilliary's (live number holder) receive 50% of a number holder's primary insurance amount. Survivors (dead number holder) receive up to 100% based on her age, whether or not the number holder was receiving reduced benefits when he died, etc. You are mixing up both the types of benefits (live number holder or dead one) and the percentage amount payable in each case.

Once again. The lady who wrote the post's ex husband is ALIVE!!! You can't get surviving divorced spouse's benefits from a living man. If he's alive, it's called spouse's benefits. Or, in her case, divorced spouse's benefits.

[happyslug]

23. Survivor's benefit is one lump sum divided among ALL survivors.

And yes you can get survivor's benefits from A LIVING PERSON, IF THAT PERSON IS "DISABLED" WHICH INCLUDES BEING OVER AGE 65. You are a Survivor if the primary income earner is "disabled".

And the purpose of my posting of 20 CFR § 404.336 was to show that the terms used IN THE ACTUAL REGULATIONS, are wife or husband, or widow or widower, NOT spouse.

Furthermore 20 CFR § 404.331 clearly states that You are entitled to these benefits even though the insured person is not yet entitled to benefits,. Please note headings of Regulations are NOT part of the actual regulations. Thus the use of "divorced spouse", in the heading has no legal significance.

§ 404.331 Who is entitled to wife's or husband's benefits as a divorced spouse.

You are entitled to wife's or husband's benefits as the divorced wife or divorced husband of an insured person who is entitled to old-age or disability benefits if you meet the requirements of paragraphs (a) through (e). You are entitled to these benefits even though the insured person is not yet entitled to benefits, if the insured person is at least age 62 and if you meet the requirements of paragraphs (a) through (f). The requirements are that—

(a) You are the insured's divorced wife or divorced husband and—

(1) You were validly married to the insured under State law as described in §404.345 or you were deemed to be validly married as described in §404.346; and

(2) You were married to the insured for at least 10 years immediately before your divorce became final;

(b) You apply;

(c) You are not married. (For purposes of meeting this requirement, you will be considered not to be married throughout the month in which the divorce occurred);

(d) You are age 62 or older throughout a month in which all other conditions of entitlement are met; and

(e) You are not entitled to an old-age or disability benefit based upon a primary insurance amount that is equal to or larger than the full wife's or husband's benefit.

(f) You have been divorced from the insured person for at least 2 years.

[44 FR 34481, June 15, 1979, as amended at 48 FR 21926, May 16, 1983; 51 FR 11911, Apr. 8, 1986; 58 FR 64891, Dec. 10, 1993]

[lunatica]

32. Do you mean that I can apply for spouse's benefits when I'm 65?

I have a friend who is getting Social Security after her ex husband died. My ex is alive and remarried. I never remarried.

[lunatica]

36. So should I apply when I'm 65 or when he is?

He's a year younger than I am.

Thanks for this information! It may make all the difference in my coming years!

[happyslug]

37. According to the regulations, apply at age 62

n/t

[lunatica]

38. Thanks. I'll do that.

[kskiska]

24. I'm collecting Survivor's Benefits

I divorced in 1974 after 12+ years and my ex remarried. I didn't. When he died last December I applied and am receiving the same amount he was getting, which is 50% more than I was getting on my own. This does not affect his present widow's benefits when she becomes eligible to collect.

[happyslug]

26. May or may not, depends on 20 CFR § 404.403 (d)

20 CFR § 404.403 (d) simply state that the numbers used in 20 CFR § 404.403 (c) is the base for the mandated increase in Social Security due to inflation. Thus I am listing 20 CFR § 404.403 (c) to show the MAXIMUM amount the survivor's benefit can be.

(c) Eligible for old-age insurance benefits or dies in 1979. If an insured individual becomes eligible for old-age insurance benefits or dies in 1979, the monthly maximum is as follows—

(1) 150 percent of the first $230 of the individual's primary insurance amount, plus

(2) 272 percent of the primary insurance amount over $230 but not over $332, plus

(3) 134 percent of the primary insurance amount over $332 but not over $433, plus

(4) 175 percent of the primary insurance amount over $433.

These are the maximum total outlays can be. In the Regulations it is possible to have several survivors who are entitled to benefits, but if the total exceeds what is permitted under 20 CFR § 404.403 (d), all will be reduced to keep the total below that max.

For a complete copy of the actual regulation see:
20 CFR Part 404, Subpart E, 20 CFR § 404.401 et seq.

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr;sid=0ad68dbfda5cb91ad7fa4faeab224e61;rgn=div6;view=text;node=20%3A2.0.1.1.5.5;idno=20;cc=ecfr

[lunatica]

34. Thank you for all the information

This may make all the difference in my future finances.

[lunatica]

35. Thanks for this info

I guess it might pay off to know if he's alive or not no matter how much I prefer to not know a thing about him.

[lunatica]

31. I was married to him for 15 years

He's still alive but I'll look into it.

[Yo_Mama]

30. 66 and that's going to 67

Oh, well.

If you take early Social Security and keep working, they take 50% of your earnings above $14,460 (2012 limit). For some older workers, that is not a problem because they are earning very little.

Current full retirement age is 66, and under current law it is increasing to 67. I see this as being quite a problem for low income elderly workers. They will go on Medicare at 65, but some will have problems paying the monthly premium from their current incomes, but if they take early SS they will be penalized.

If you have to take SS early to pay the Medicare premiums, then you will get penalized later when you are really old and not able to work in the form of lower benefit checks. But if you can't afford to take Medicare at 65, you will be penalized in the form of higher Medicare premiums.

I think there ought to be a rescue clause for older low-income retirees.

[lunatica]

33. Are you saying that it's best to wait until I'm 66 or 67?

Or do I need to wait until I can't work anymore at maybe 70 or 75? Whenever my body or mind finally can't do it anymore?

[Yo_Mama]

39. Once you pass your full retirement age, you can work without penalty

If you are able to work and bank the extra SS funds, that's what I would do. Then in later years you can use your savings to supplement lower SS checks.

You can still put money in an IRA and not pay federal taxes on it if you are still working.

If you are going to have very low income later, you may want to defer taking SS for a year or two longer for higher income each month then.

I believe SS benefits are going to be cut, so I'd advise almost everyone to take SS as soon as they are able to get full benefits. I really don't see the downside for most people, because if you can work for two years longer and bank an additional 20-30K, those savings will really come in handy later.

You will pay extra taxes on your income if you are taking SS benefits and still working, even without the penalty. But you get an extra age deduction still, I think, and you can cut your income by using the IRA/Qualifed Retirement plan dodge, and you should be able to put an extra 10K aside.

Plus, future cuts to SS are likely to be disproportionately applied to those with higher monthly SS checks, so it's probably going to pay you to get more money earlier.

SS retirement age table is here:
http://www.ssa.gov/retire2/retirechart.htm

Born in 1960 or later is 67. Born 43-54 is 66. Between those points it goes up by a couple of months, so that if you were born in 1957, it is 66 and 1/2.

Realistically, a lot of older workers will have to slow down and will find that they can maybe work half-time in their late 60s. As you get older it is harder to withstand the stress of working full-time.

[RebelOne]

41. I did. I started collecting social security when I hit 65.

And I was also collecting a full salary. I would still be working today if I hadn't been laid off in 2010. I did not even bother looking for another job because I knew no one would hire me at the age of 71. So, fortunately, I had some savings and a 401K, so I will be all right for a few more years.

[secondvariety]

9. Not this guy

I've sacrificed my body enough for the blood suckers. I'll become a ward of the state first.

[baldguy]

10. I don't think I could stand being retired.

It would drive me nuts.

[1monster]

11. That's BS about baby boomers. I've already told my husband he can't

retire until at the earliest age 75 (he turned 65 this year).

I expect that I will have to work at least until 75 and most of boomer I know are in the same boat as us: Not sure if we will every be able to completely retire. Those inheritances are not making it past final illness and old age care.

[Marrah_G]

13. I'll be working until I am dead

Unless something big changes. people talk about 401 ks, stock, savings, pensions..... all that is foreign to me

[rhett o rick]

14. Good luck getting hired after 55. nm

[rhett o rick]

15. It isnt how long you will "have" to work, it's how long will you be able to work.

My father worked hard all his life and it took a toll. When he retired at 62 he was already pushing his luck with a heart attack. He had by-pass immediately. He also had a shoulder replaced. He could not have worked past 62.

Also, with the shrinking job market, will there be jobs for those over 55?

[ProfessionalLeftist]

16. Most will be unable to find work beyond 50

So they/we're all just screwed - and that's just the way Congress wants it.

[marmar]

17. Work 'til you drop. Literally.

nt

[NBachers]

18. Yup- I've always figured it's best to drop dead at work- then someone's there to deal with it

only halfway joking

At 63, I know I'll be getting the best bang for my Social Security buck if I keep going 'till I'm 70. I've got a little 401K and keep putting about a hundred a week into that.

I work with a guy who just turned 82. Everybody loves the guy, and life wouldn't be the same without him. He's right in thinking that you stay alive when you've got a reason to get out of bed and go out into the world every day.

I like to see myself as a peppy, active retired guy, but it's also easy to turn into a home-slug if there's nothing pushing me.

[Ilsa]

25. Yeah, but will employers permit it?

They don't like providing medical insurance for people who use it more.

Honestly, even if I could last until age 70, I wonder if it wouldn't be better to deceive one's employer about your age.

[sylvi]

27. That sucks pondwater

I was hoping to retire in another year. I've been able to save pretty well, but I'm afraid inflation will eat it all up. And with what's going on with SS...

[UpYourMedsNow]

28. I was planning to retire at 55 but thanks

to Bush and his pals I have to now wait till 62-65.

I know I got it better than most but I still want to see the people responsible sent to jail. If Iceland can do it, America can do it unless of course America is now so corrupt it will never happen in a million years. Heck this country even refuses to go after admitted war criminals now so I am not holding my breath.

[FreeJoe]

40. I won't have to, but I will

I'm fortunate enough to be covered by a pension with retiree medical benefits. I'm in my late 40's. I plan to retire in my mid to late 50's. Following that, I'll keep working, but in different ways. I'll work contract jobs. I'll also branch out and start shifting some of my hobbies (photography/videography) into professional jobs. I don't think I'll make much money with them, but I'll enjoy it. I'm not the relax on the beach type. I'll retire, but I hope to be very productive in my retirement.

[Bake]

42. What is this "retirement" you speak of?

I expect to have to work until I drop ...

Bake