# Here Comes the Demise of Old Folks'Income!



## imp (Jan 9, 2016)

*The Bipartisan Budget Act hides a dirty secret that could cost Americans an estimated $11.4 billion


“Instead of holding  a public debate, Congress tacked these changes onto an emergency bill…There was  no public evaluation or discussion of these changes, and there are still no publicly identified authors of these  reforms.”

"Congress has hidden, in a seemingly innocent piece of  legislation, a radical reform that threatens the financial security of as many  as 21.3 million Americans."

"Buried deep on page 70 of The Bipartisan Budget Act, in Section 831, is a clause Congress  classified as “the closure of unintended  loopholes.”
And it could result in an estimated $11.4 billion in wealth failing  to reach the bank accounts of Americans. 
A Harvard economist has determined this could cost some people  $50,000. But others stand to lose much more."

"To give you an idea of how suspicious this situation is, Time Magazine, a publication not known  for aggressive reporting has written: 
“Instead of holding  a public debate, Congress tacked these changes onto an emergency bill…There was  no public evaluation or discussion of these changes, and there are still no publicly identified authors of these  reforms.”

http://moneymorning.com/acq/ss/the-...4-billion?iris=453611&ad=b4-cpchrl-hnds#close

Trust in your government's decisions to provide equitable living conditions for ALL it's citizens. Eventually, SQUALOR FOR ALL, except the policy-makers.   imp


*


----------



## Lethe200 (Jan 12, 2016)

US News & World Report respectfully disagrees, and so do I:

http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs...3/how-the-budget-deal-changes-social-security

Basically, the biggest loophole is taken advantage of by high-earning couples. In my own personal case, where both my DH and I worked middle-income jobs (well under $100K/yr), there is NO advantage to this "loophole" at all: "....*No more double claiming. Some dual-earner married couples who are 66 or older have been claiming Social Security benefits twice. They first collect spousal payments worth half of the higher earner’s benefit amount, and then later switch to payments based on their own work record, which are then higher due to delayed claiming. People who turn 62 in 2016 or later will no longer be able to claim these two types of payments at different times."*

The second loophole does affect many middle-class couples, however: "....*Dependents can’t claim payments if you suspend your payments. In the past, you could claim Social Security benefits and immediately suspend them, which allowed a spouse and sometimes dependent children to claim payments based on your work record while you continue to accrue delayed retirement credits that allow you to claim larger payments later on in retirement. The new legislation changes the rules so that if you suspend your Social Security payments, your spouse or children who receive payments based on your work record will no longer receive them until you start your payments again. "*

The basic premise of waiting until age 70 to file for SocSec to achieve the maximum monthly benefit IS NOT AFFECTED. And people who have already taken advantage of these loopholes in previous filings ARE NOT AFFECTED. 

Again, per the article: "...*Married individuals are still eligible to claim payments* worth up to 50 percent of the higher earning spouse’s benefit, if that amount is higher than payments based on the lower earning spouse’s work record. And widows and widowers inherit their spouse’s benefit payment when it is higher than their existing benefit. "


----------



## Butterfly (Jan 12, 2016)

Doesn't look like any of this will affect me, either.


----------

