@sax : I do not believe that is correct. You have to be FRA to use File & Suspend, and that option – unlike Restricted Application – is not grandfathered for those presently 62.
Yes. I was wrong. It is the restricted application that is grandfathered in for those 62 by jan.1 2016
I am still shocked every time I see my profile on a thread that I haven’t posted on. 
Benefits for the poor are cut frequently without much notice. This cut will mean less fun money for many but since it only effected higher wage earners it won’t mean choosing between medicine and food. disappointing but not a threat to survival at least.
It affected anyone with a spouse, and the ability and inclination to defer their own benefit to age 70 by working or living off their savings. But only those younger.
The Obama administration included this in their proposed budget much earlier this year.
Does anyone know if the rule change will apply for someone who is divorced? I had planned to investigate drawing against ExH when he hit FRA and then switching over to my own benefit at age 70. It’s been tricky forecasting since I know nothing except that he has worked more years than me and has likely maxed out OASDI contributions for many years.
@2VU0609 : I think (emphasize “think”) that you can still do that. If you were born in '53 or earlier, that is just a version of restricted application. When it’s an ex-spouse, I’m not sure you even need to have been born "53 or earlier. And, I think (again, emphasize “think”) that you can claim at his FRA even if he has not filed – unlike those who are still married. The budget bill does not appear to have changed these rules: https://www.ssa.gov/planners/retire/divspouse.html
Same situation here --when do you turn 62? It looks like unless you were born in 1953 or prior, you (and me) are out of luck, if your own SS entitlement is more than the 1/2 share you would get from the ex. Apparently there was an option that would have allowed us to apply for the spousal benefit while holding back from applying under our own accounts, and that seems to be what has now been taken off the table.
So regardless if my DH was born later, I can file and suspend whenever I hit whatever age is the magic $ because I am already 62? Yes?
I don’t think so @jym626 . I believe you have the option of restricted application which is different. But you are not full retirement age, and won’t be within the next six months, so I believe the file and suspend option is no longer available to you.
Thumper is correct.
Then what does the magic birthyear of 1953 mean?
It lets you continue the Restricted Application option. Not the same as File & Suspend/
I don’t believe this will have much impact overall.
Only something like 5% of people start collecting after FRA. And I believe that most of these need the benefits; they can’t wait three or four more years because they don’t have the assets to fund their retirement during those 3-4 years.
I see a lot of noise that “millions” of people will be “devastated” by these changes. It’s hard to find actual numbers, but one site claimed that less that 1/10 of 1% of people collection SS are actually currently doing file and suspend. Maybe if everyone did this it would be millions, but the fact is that almost no one can or will wait until age 70 to collect their benefit.
So most of this is a tempest in a teapot, and affects a small number of relatively wealthy people who can afford to fund close to 100% of their retirement from their own funds until SS finally kicks in at 70.
I’m glad they are closing this loophole, as I don’t want taxes increased on my kids and (future) grandkids to fund my retirement and especially people who are double-dipping. On the other hand, so few people actually do this that the overall savings are going to be very small.
The bogus “trust fund” is still going to “run out” in 2034, after which current taxes will only cover about 75% of benefits - pure pay-as-you-go.
And I hope everyone realizes that tapping the “trust fund” requires either raising income taxes on everyone to pay for the bonds being cashed in, or borrowing it. Neither is very palatable but that’s what we’ve been stuck with, because there’s no real assets in the trust fund, just a bunch of IOU’s the government gave to itself.
I think that’s incorrect. I think file and suspend still exists for **everyone/b … but the rules have been changed so that in the future no one else (spouse, ex-spouse, minor or disable children) will be able to receive benefits during the period of suspension. So there will be no benefit to suspension except in situations where the person’s financial situation changes so that they don’t need the money they thought they would need. (Example: worker retires from 40-hour-a-week daily grind job at age 66 and then gets offered a lucrative consulting job at age 67)
@AbouttheSame, I was born in '57, so I’m not even close. Drat! Just close enough to dream about retirement in under 10 years!
On a positive note, this makes Social Security planning much more straightforward. Other then deciding when to take it, fewer options to consider.
@notrichenough , you are correct - clearly not enough people are affected that politicians feel they need to worry about it! That is why the changes were made and received such little coverage. I didn’t find out that there were “changes to Social Security” until after the budget deal was passed by the House, and even then I had to do research to find out what those changes were. When I found out, I was surprised. Even the AARP strongly supported the budget deal! AARP was much more concerned (and pleased) about the support of the disability program and Medicare premiums which affect far more seniors. This quote is from an article in the NY Times.
^^That may be true, but I believe a lot more were PLANNING on taking advantage of it, and now can’t…
Won’t file-and-suspend at full retirement age still be a good idea for those planning to wait to 70 to collect? I thought if you did that, and then at any point before 70 you can “unsuspend” benefits and get the accrued benefits in a lump sum. That would be very useful if you had some condition where you learned at 68 that your life expectancy was under 5 years, or with similar situations.