NATIONAL
May 22, 2012 | By David G. Savage, Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON - A widow who conceived a baby from the sperm of her late husband is not automatically entitled to Social Security survivors benefits to help raise the child, the Supreme Court ruled Monday. The 9-0 decision rejected the claim that a biological child of a married couple, even one born years after the father died, always qualifies as his survivor under the Social Security Act. Instead, the justices upheld the government's multi-part definition of who deserves survivors benefits.
BUSINESS
May 20, 2012 | By Scott J. Wilson, Los Angeles Times
Social Security has gone digital. The federal retirement program, which last year stopped mailing out estimated benefit statements to everyone who has paid into the system, launched an Internet tool this month that can be used to view several aspects of your personal status. Here's how to use the online tool. Sign up: Go to http://www.ssa.gov/mystatement to create your online account. You must have a Social Security number, email address and U.S. mailing address, and be at least 18. Create a user name and password (save them someplace safe)
BUSINESS
May 20, 2012 | Liz Weston, Money Talk
Dear Liz: Our mother just turned 64, and our father is divorcing her. She hasn't worked in years because of significant physical and mental health issues. My sister and I have been trying to figure out how she's going to survive on $750 a month, which is the equivalent of half his Social Security. She has always had serious issues with money management, which is why there are no retirement savings or a house. We are now about to embark on the maze of social service benefits that an older woman below the poverty line can receive, partly so we can decide whether she's better off staying put where she is in Arkansas, moving to my sister's in Texas, moving to be near me in Maryland, or moving to her childhood home of Chicago, where most of her friends are. For a lot of complicated reasons (mostly related to the mental health issues)
OPINION
May 3, 2012
Re "Don't rush for Social Security," Business, April 29 While it is true that delaying collecting your normal Social Security benefit beyond your full retirement age gives you an 8% annual increase, to get that 8% increase you give up 100% of the normal benefit you could be collecting. Here's an example: You can start collecting $1,000 a month at 66 or delay until age 70 (48 months), and get $1,320 a month (8% yearly increase for 4 years). To get that extra $320 a month you've given up $48,000 that you could have already collected, and you'll be over 82 before you finally catch up - if you live that long.
OPINION
May 2, 2012
Re "Two views of Social Security," Postscript, April 28 I have a solution for Social Security: Why not let the Social Security deduction tax all wages, as the Medicare deduction does? What is the reasoning behind Social Security stopping at $110,100? This makes no sense to me. Why just penalize the average worker with this deduction and let the rich cease paying at this foolish number? This solution would fund the account for decades to come. Seems like a very simple solution.
BUSINESS
April 29, 2012 | Liz Weston, Money Talk
Dear Liz: I am 661/2 and eligible to collect my full Social Security benefit now. I am in good health and assume I will live into my 80s. I am still working and don't need the extra money. Is it better to put off taking my benefit so that it will grow 8% with Uncle Sam, tax free and guaranteed, or should I take the money now, pay taxes on it and invest it? Politically speaking, I think I should take it, but my gut says let it grow. What do you think? Is there a program available to demonstrate the differences?