Thank you so much and thank you for your kind thoughts. This seems to be a lesser known provision. I believe it was created for a time when women often did not work outside the home and were left with nothing if their spouse divorced them late in life. Fortunately I have a good job and can take care of myself, but dividing the assets is tricky. He is reluctant to give me the 50/50 split of his pension that MA usually awards. If he is able to collect my SS then it would be more equitable. I'll just have to figure out if the MA windfall act prevents him from doing that.I am currently going through a gray divorce. Married 35 years. Neither of us is retired yet. A family of modest means. My husband has a state funded teachers pension that I am seeking a portion of. I was home raising our children for many years and have a small 401k that I started when I began working full time corporate work again, but that is all I have, in addition to my Social Security.
We live in MA which has the Massachusetts Windfall act, preventing my husband from drawing a pension and social security even though he didn't start teaching until he was in his thirties and has worked in summers, etc. He will recieve some small portion of his SS-maybe15%?
Here's my question-I have been told by couple of people that since we were married for such a long time, that in retirement, he can file for MY social security and it would not impact my social security. That this is a lesser known provision in SS. Any pros out there know if this is true? And if it is, if he would again be subject to the MA windfall provision which would prohibit him receiving most of it? If he is able to get this money it would help my bargaining position. Thanks so much for your thoughts and help
Welcome to Bogleheads!
(And sorry about the reason for your first post...)
Yes, if spouses have been married at least 10 years, then after divorce, *either* spouse is able to file for SS spousal benefits with *NO* effect on that other spouse's SS benefit.
Indeed, the "other spouse" does NOT need to have filed, unlike if they were still married.
(I suspect, and this may be stated explicitly, that part of the rule is to stop a vindictive ex-spouse from declining to file so that the other spouse is then also unable to file...??)
I don't have any knowledge about your specific windfall question.
RM
Statistics: Posted by MKCP5 — Tue Jun 18, 2024 6:03 am — Replies 8 — Views 1238