any tips on filing for Social Security benefits ( US)?

[beachproperty]

The OP should consider delaying his SS benefits for some years. Every year he delays his future benefits go up by around 7% per year forever ever. If his Thai wife indeed lived with him in the US legally for at least 5 years she will be eligible for a spousal benefit of half of his benefit when she is 62 or over and she will be entitled to inherit his entire benefit when he dies. If, as it seems, she is younger than he that means that the SSA could be paying her the stepped up benefits (plus cost of living adjustments) decades from now.

As an example, let's consider a SS recipient whose Full Retirement Age is 66 at which time his monthly benefit will be $1600. If he were to start taking his benefits at age 62, his monthly benefit would be $1200 forever. And that's the survivor's benefit (at age 66) that his wife would receive when he dies. (In all cases benefits are increased annually by the cost of living adjustment factor. So, we can ignore that in comparing benefits.) If he delays taking his benefits until he is 70 years old his monthly benefit for life becomes $2,112. And his wife would expect to inherit that benefit when he dies.

Of course, this analysis assumes that the OP can afford to meet his cost of living between ages 62 and 70 without the SS benefit. That appears to be true because he is planning on saving the benefits for his daughter's education. That being so delaying SS benefits is sure investment with an excellent return. The younger his wife is the longer she is likely to survive him and the more important the stepped up benefit will be. If he has a school-aged daughter then his wife is probably much younger than he.

Let's consider the difference in the dollar amount of the estimated lifelong benefits. The OP is 62. Let's assume he lives until age 85. Assume also that his wife is 40 and that she will live until age 85 also. Here are the lifelong SS benefits (again not including COLAs):

if he takes benefits at age 62 and wife takes at 66: his benefit: $331,200 + her benefit: $273,600 for a total of $604,800

if he takes benefits at age 66 and wife takes at 66: his benefit: $384,000 + her benefit: $364,800 for a total of $748,800

if he takes befits at age 70 and wife takes at age 66: his benefit: $430,848 + her benefit: $481,536 for a total of $912,384

Given that his stated motivation is to fund his daughter's education which implies that he doesn't need the benefits to live on, then if the daughter is now 10 years old or younger then if he waits until age 70 then he could dedicate his entire monthly SS benefit of $2,112 to the daughter just at the point where she is starting college. If his goal is a private education for the daughter prior to college, then the SS benefit would not arrive in time.

Most people take benefits at age 62. Many cannot afford to wait. But for those who can afford to delay the benefit is substantial and all the more so with a younger wife.

Since the Captain is so intent on delaying SS benefits it might be wise to consider....instead of saying living to 85, might be better to use the average life expectancy of a US male ....77.40 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

As such taking benefits (using your numbers 1200@62, 1600@66 and 2112@70) The lifetime benefits received would be as follows

62............$221,760

66............$218.880

70............$187,545

Now, the best part is, we are free to determine when we want to start receiving our benefits. For those of us who are in ill health, or have medical conditions that might preclude us from living to the average age we can take benefits at 62!

Those who are in great health and want to bet that they will outlive the average and can afford to wait .....WAIT.

Point is Captain, one shoe size does not fit all, and even saying that and based on the average life expectancy its better to take your benefits as early as possible.

Edited November 18, 2014 by beachproperty

[thailiketoo]

Email the embassy and they email you back a package. Fill that out and email it to Manila. Manila emails you an appointment time by phone for an interview - don't miss the phone call. Have a direct deposit account set up at Bank of Bangkok and tell the Manila SS man that number.

SS will be started and your checks wired to the Bank of Bangkok direct deposit account which you can access from any Bank of Bangkok with the passbook and your passport.

I don't know about the wife and children stuff. Seems to me I remember that not being married for more than 10 years my divorced American ex wife could not go after my SS benefits.

If you are sick and can't go to the bank seems I remember the American Embassy has some thing or the bank that you can do about that. I think I read about it on Thai Visa but not sure.

The advantage of having a direct deposit account that you can only get if you are alive and show up at the bank with a passport should be obvious to those of us who live in Thailand

Edited November 18, 2014 by thailiketoo

[CaptHaddock]

The OP should consider delaying his SS benefits for some years. Every year he delays his future benefits go up by around 7% per year forever ever. If his Thai wife indeed lived with him in the US legally for at least 5 years she will be eligible for a spousal benefit of half of his benefit when she is 62 or over and she will be entitled to inherit his entire benefit when he dies. If, as it seems, she is younger than he that means that the SSA could be paying her the stepped up benefits (plus cost of living adjustments) decades from now.

As an example, let's consider a SS recipient whose Full Retirement Age is 66 at which time his monthly benefit will be $1600. If he were to start taking his benefits at age 62, his monthly benefit would be $1200 forever. And that's the survivor's benefit (at age 66) that his wife would receive when he dies. (In all cases benefits are increased annually by the cost of living adjustment factor. So, we can ignore that in comparing benefits.) If he delays taking his benefits until he is 70 years old his monthly benefit for life becomes $2,112. And his wife would expect to inherit that benefit when he dies.

Of course, this analysis assumes that the OP can afford to meet his cost of living between ages 62 and 70 without the SS benefit. That appears to be true because he is planning on saving the benefits for his daughter's education. That being so delaying SS benefits is sure investment with an excellent return. The younger his wife is the longer she is likely to survive him and the more important the stepped up benefit will be. If he has a school-aged daughter then his wife is probably much younger than he.

Let's consider the difference in the dollar amount of the estimated lifelong benefits. The OP is 62. Let's assume he lives until age 85. Assume also that his wife is 40 and that she will live until age 85 also. Here are the lifelong SS benefits (again not including COLAs):

if he takes benefits at age 62 and wife takes at 66: his benefit: $331,200 + her benefit: $273,600 for a total of $604,800

if he takes benefits at age 66 and wife takes at 66: his benefit: $384,000 + her benefit: $364,800 for a total of $748,800

if he takes befits at age 70 and wife takes at age 66: his benefit: $430,848 + her benefit: $481,536 for a total of $912,384

Given that his stated motivation is to fund his daughter's education which implies that he doesn't need the benefits to live on, then if the daughter is now 10 years old or younger then if he waits until age 70 then he could dedicate his entire monthly SS benefit of $2,112 to the daughter just at the point where she is starting college. If his goal is a private education for the daughter prior to college, then the SS benefit would not arrive in time.

Most people take benefits at age 62. Many cannot afford to wait. But for those who can afford to delay the benefit is substantial and all the more so with a younger wife.

Since the Captain is so intent on delaying SS benefits it might be wise to consider....instead of saying living to 85, might be better to use the average life expectancy of a US male ....77.40 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

As such taking benefits (using your numbers 1200@62, 1600@66 and 2112@70) The lifetime benefits received would be as follows

62............$221,760

66............$218.880

70............$187,545

Now, the best part is, we are free to determine when we want to start receiving our benefits. For those of us who are in ill health, or have medical conditions that might preclude us from living to the average age we can take benefits at 62!

Those who are in great health and want to bet that they will outlive the average and can afford to wait .....WAIT.

Point is Captain, one shoe size does not fit all, and even saying that and based on the average life expectancy its better to take your benefits as early as possible.

You're displaying innumeracy, BeachProp.

1. Average life span at birth for a US male may be 77 years, but for a male aged 62 it is about 82 years. Which means that 50% live longer than that.

2. Your tally of benefits counts only those benefits for the OP himself leaving out the increased benefits the wife can obtain by his delaying. Why do you omit the wife? Since she is younger, and probably much younger than the OP, she is very likely to collect more from the SSA over her lifespan than he is. Except for men who simply don't care what happens to their wives after they die, this omission skews the numbers hopelessly.

The good reason to take benefits at age 62 is if you cannot pay your cost of living otherwise. Most of the rest of the people who make that choice are making the wrong choice, probably because they don't understand what is at stake, or simply lack the disciple to take the long view.

[NeverSure]

There are many fundamental misconceptions here.

When Reagan appointed the Greenspan Commission in 1983 there was no Trust Fund and there was no surplus of any kind. Indeed, the SSA was probably only weeks away from being unable to pay benefits in full. Among the reforms recommended by the Commission and subsequently implemented was an increase in the payroll tax beyond the level needed to pay current benefits, to establish and fund the SS Trust Fund which was created just for the purpose of building up reserves in anticipation of the increase in benefits payments that the retirement of the baby boomers would entail. We boomers are the pig-in-the-python demographically and the Commission (and others) recognized that provision would have to be made in advance. And so the Trust Fund was created to accumulate assets in advance for the boomer retirements at which point the Trust Fund would be exhausted and the system would revert to the pay-as-you-go status it had between 1935 and 1983.

Contrary to your claim, the funds accumulated in the Trust Fund have never been, and are still not being used, to pay out SS benefits. The special US Treasury obligations held in the Trust Fund pay interest which interest has added to the Trust Fund annually. Recently, the SSA has had to start using some of the interest received from the Trust Fund to make beneficiary payments since, after all, the boomers have started to collect as foreseen. Eventually, all of the interest will be used in this way and the Treasury obligations themselves, as they become due, will also be used to pay beneficiaries, according to the original purpose of the Trust Fund.

The Treasury obligations that the SS Trust Fund holds are not the same marketable securities as ordinary US Treasury Bonds and Bills. Nevertheless, they represent obligations of the US Govt which is the Trustee of the Trust Fund, not its owner.

It will apparently be news to you to learn that Ordinary US Treasury Bonds, the special US Treasury obligations held in the SS Trust Fund, corporate bonds, commerical paper, bank certificates of deposit, and nearly all other debt instruments are every one of them "IOUs", that is, promises to pay. The special US Treasury obligations held in the Trust Fund are, indeed, backed by the full faith and credit of the US Treasury, despite your belief to the contrary. The world bond market treats the full faith and credit of the US Treasury as the highest guarantee in the world. The use of the pejorative term "IOU" does not impugn the creditworthiness of the US govt in the least.

It's hardly a secret that the right wingers have been attacking SS and Medicare for decades. Bush would have converted SS to private stock market accounts just in time for the 2008 crash, if the American people had let him, but they didn't. If you choose to feel offended by including yourself in that number, that's up to you.

I hate to be the one to tell you this, Left Winger, but the "special bonds" in the so-called Trust Fund:

"The trust funds do not represent a legal obligation to Social Security program recipients, and Congress could cut or raise taxes on such benefits if it chooses, and are considered "intra-governmental" debt, a component of the "public" or "national" debt. As of April 2012, the intragovernmental debt was $4.8 trillion of the $15.7 trillion national debt."

LINK

You've posted enough incorrect crap, coming off as an expert who people might believe, that you should just stop posting.

[NeverSure]

Let's consider the difference in the dollar amount of the estimated lifelong benefits. The OP is 62. Let's assume he lives until age 85. Assume also that his wife is 40 and that she will live until age 85 also. Here are the lifelong SS benefits (again not including COLAs):

if he takes benefits at age 62 and wife takes at 66: his benefit: $331,200 + her benefit: $273,600 for a total of $604,800

if he takes benefits at age 66 and wife takes at 66: his benefit: $384,000 + her benefit: $364,800 for a total of $748,800

if he takes befits at age 70 and wife takes at age 66: his benefit: $430,848 + her benefit: $481,536 for a total of $912,384

Do your numbers over, Left Winger. The most a wife can collect of her husband's Social Security monthly is 50%.

If she elects to collect at age 62, it's about 1/3 of what he would have collected, monthly if he waited to full retirement age.

SS Admin. Fact Sheet.

[Mrjlh]

Because the BS gets thick on this board sometimes with all the supposed Experts arguing with each other, here's the pdf file directly from Social Security. Read it...If you don't understand it call them!

EN-05-10137.pdf

[Langsuan Man]

If anyone bothered to pay attention to the OP he specifically stated that he did not want any advice about delaying the start of his payments, just the best way to apply

[thailiketoo]

If anyone bothered to pay attention to the OP he specifically stated that he did not want any advice about delaying the start of his payments, just the best way to apply

Agree 100%. Seems obvious the OP would want people to advise him who have applied for SS from Thailand. He also asked about applying 6 months before starting and I think that is correct.

At any rate the SS questionnaire is quite detailed and I'm sure any questions about dependent coverage will be answered on there. Start with the embassy and then Manila and get a direct deposit bank account with Bangkok Bank and everything is pretty easy in my experience.

I wish all the fellows who want to argue about things they don't know anything about especially outside of Thailand would open a new thread and let the OP get the information he was asking for.

PS. Watch the mail in Thailand. I've had a number of SS letters go missing as I think the people around me thought they contained money and they stole them.

SS will write you every year in June for me to make sure you are still alive. People stole mine a couple of times and they stopped my benefits because I didn't know SS mailed out the form every year. SSA 7162

Edited November 18, 2014 by thailiketoo

[beachproperty]

OK ....the discussion got waylaid by the Captain and in my initial response to him I pointed out that OP was not interested but responded because he was wrong in that waiting is not for everyone....AND apparently not for OP as he specificly requested no need for a discussion on that point.

Age 62 applying for benefits

The earliest age at which you can begin receiving your Social Security retirement benefits is 62. You can apply for your benefits 3 months before you turn 62 if you want your payments to start at that age.

Are You Ready To Apply For Your Benefits? - Social Security

www.ssa.gov/retire2/applying3.htm

Online application

Just did it Today! From Thailand! so don't know why the requirement to go through the embassy and manila as some posters have indicated. Maybe they will

redirect my application to Manila? Will let you know.

[thailiketoo]

OK ....the discussion got waylaid by the Captain and in my initial response to him I pointed out that OP was not interested but responded because he was wrong in that waiting is not for everyone....AND apparently not for OP as he specificly requested no need for a discussion on that point.

Age 62 applying for benefits

The earliest age at which you can begin receiving your Social Security retirement benefits is 62. You can apply for your benefits 3 months before you turn 62 if you want your payments to start at that age.

Are You Ready To Apply For Your Benefits? - Social Security

www.ssa.gov/retire2/applying3.htm

Online application

Just did it Today! From Thailand! so don't know why the requirement to go through the embassy and manila as some posters have indicated. Maybe they will

redirect my application to Manila? Will let you know.

When I applied could not do it online from Thailand. Perhaps that has changed. This is what I got from the Embassy in Thailand.

To apply for SS’s benefit in Thailand, you have to apply via the US Embassy in Bangkok. You can apply 3 month prior your date of birth.

We will send your application to SSA in Manila. You don’t have to submit any documents yet, please complete the attached form and send it back to us.

After we send your inquiry to SSA in Manila, the case worker in Manila will interview you by phone and give the list of require document to you.

You may have to bring them to the US Embassy in Bangkok for certified copies. The whole process may take about 3-6 month depends on how complicated of the case.

[beachproperty]

OK ....the discussion got waylaid by the Captain and in my initial response to him I pointed out that OP was not interested but responded because he was wrong in that waiting is not for everyone....AND apparently not for OP as he specificly requested no need for a discussion on that point.

Age 62 applying for benefits

The earliest age at which you can begin receiving your Social Security retirement benefits is 62. You can apply for your benefits 3 months before you turn 62 if you want your payments to start at that age.

Are You Ready To Apply For Your Benefits? - Social Security

www.ssa.gov/retire2/applying3.htm

Online application

Just did it Today! From Thailand! so don't know why the requirement to go through the embassy and manila as some posters have indicated. Maybe they will

redirect my application to Manila? Will let you know.

When I applied could not do it online from Thailand. Perhaps that has changed. This is what I got from the Embassy in Thailand.

To apply for SS’s benefit in Thailand, you have to apply via the US Embassy in Bangkok. You can apply 3 month prior your date of birth.

We will send your application to SSA in Manila. You don’t have to submit any documents yet, please complete the attached form and send it back to us.

After we send your inquiry to SSA in Manila, the case worker in Manila will interview you by phone and give the list of require document to you.

You may have to bring them to the US Embassy in Bangkok for certified copies. The whole process may take about 3-6 month depends on how complicated of the case.

Well I'm hoping things have changed....I submitted my application online from Thailand today AND they accepted it and gave me a tracking #. In 5 days I can sign in again and see how it is progressing. How complicated can it be to get social security that I'm entitled to. I turn 62 in Feb. and want my benefits to start then, so I guess I have 3 months to iron out the wrinkles before then, if there are any. The online application asks some VERY specific questions that only I would know (and, I guess, apparently the gov knows) to make sure I am who I say I am. They have my number in Thailand and maybe will give me a call for an interview? Don't know the whole process as I said, just applied today.

Edited November 18, 2014 by beachproperty

[CaptHaddock]

Let's consider the difference in the dollar amount of the estimated lifelong benefits. The OP is 62. Let's assume he lives until age 85. Assume also that his wife is 40 and that she will live until age 85 also. Here are the lifelong SS benefits (again not including COLAs):

if he takes benefits at age 62 and wife takes at 66: his benefit: $331,200 + her benefit: $273,600 for a total of $604,800

if he takes benefits at age 66 and wife takes at 66: his benefit: $384,000 + her benefit: $364,800 for a total of $748,800

if he takes befits at age 70 and wife takes at age 66: his benefit: $430,848 + her benefit: $481,536 for a total of $912,384

Do your numbers over, Left Winger. The most a wife can collect of her husband's Social Security monthly is 50%.

If she elects to collect at age 62, it's about 1/3 of what he would have collected, monthly if he waited to full retirement age.

SS Admin. Fact Sheet.

Wrong again. The most she can collect as a spousal benefit, i.e. while her husband is alive and collecting, is 50% of his benefit. However, when he dies she becomes eligible for the widow's benefit which is 100% of his benefit, but she can't collect both the spousal and widow's benefit simultaneously.

Edited November 18, 2014 by CaptHaddock

[CaptHaddock]

There are many fundamental misconceptions here.

When Reagan appointed the Greenspan Commission in 1983 there was no Trust Fund and there was no surplus of any kind. Indeed, the SSA was probably only weeks away from being unable to pay benefits in full. Among the reforms recommended by the Commission and subsequently implemented was an increase in the payroll tax beyond the level needed to pay current benefits, to establish and fund the SS Trust Fund which was created just for the purpose of building up reserves in anticipation of the increase in benefits payments that the retirement of the baby boomers would entail. We boomers are the pig-in-the-python demographically and the Commission (and others) recognized that provision would have to be made in advance. And so the Trust Fund was created to accumulate assets in advance for the boomer retirements at which point the Trust Fund would be exhausted and the system would revert to the pay-as-you-go status it had between 1935 and 1983.

Contrary to your claim, the funds accumulated in the Trust Fund have never been, and are still not being used, to pay out SS benefits. The special US Treasury obligations held in the Trust Fund pay interest which interest has added to the Trust Fund annually. Recently, the SSA has had to start using some of the interest received from the Trust Fund to make beneficiary payments since, after all, the boomers have started to collect as foreseen. Eventually, all of the interest will be used in this way and the Treasury obligations themselves, as they become due, will also be used to pay beneficiaries, according to the original purpose of the Trust Fund.

The Treasury obligations that the SS Trust Fund holds are not the same marketable securities as ordinary US Treasury Bonds and Bills. Nevertheless, they represent obligations of the US Govt which is the Trustee of the Trust Fund, not its owner.

It will apparently be news to you to learn that Ordinary US Treasury Bonds, the special US Treasury obligations held in the SS Trust Fund, corporate bonds, commerical paper, bank certificates of deposit, and nearly all other debt instruments are every one of them "IOUs", that is, promises to pay. The special US Treasury obligations held in the Trust Fund are, indeed, backed by the full faith and credit of the US Treasury, despite your belief to the contrary. The world bond market treats the full faith and credit of the US Treasury as the highest guarantee in the world. The use of the pejorative term "IOU" does not impugn the creditworthiness of the US govt in the least.

It's hardly a secret that the right wingers have been attacking SS and Medicare for decades. Bush would have converted SS to private stock market accounts just in time for the 2008 crash, if the American people had let him, but they didn't. If you choose to feel offended by including yourself in that number, that's up to you.

I hate to be the one to tell you this, Left Winger, but the "special bonds" in the so-called Trust Fund:

"The trust funds do not represent a legal obligation to Social Security program recipients, and Congress could cut or raise taxes on such benefits if it chooses, and are considered "intra-governmental" debt, a component of the "public" or "national" debt. As of April 2012, the intragovernmental debt was $4.8 trillion of the $15.7 trillion national debt."

LINK

You've posted enough incorrect crap, coming off as an expert who people might believe, that you should just stop posting.

The Social Security Administration disagrees with the nameless author of your wikipedia page:

Far from being "worthless IOUs," the investments held by the trust funds are backed by the full faith and credit of the U. S. Government. The government has always repaid Social Security, with interest. The special-issue securities are, therefore, just as safe as U.S. Savings Bonds or other financial instruments of the Federal government.

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/fundFAQ.html#a0=6

Once again you intone the ominous phrase "intra-governmental debt" as though that magically establishes the insolvency of the US government like the pejorative "IOUs." Well, yes, the Trust Fund contains special US govt bonds that are part of the intra-governmental debt that the US Treasury has always paid on time and regarded by the world bond market as the safest debt in the world. Safer than corporate bonds, bank CDs, commercial paper, mutual funds, etc. That is to say, safe.

[beachproperty]

There are many fundamental misconceptions here.

When Reagan appointed the Greenspan Commission in 1983 there was no Trust Fund and there was no surplus of any kind. Indeed, the SSA was probably only weeks away from being unable to pay benefits in full. Among the reforms recommended by the Commission and subsequently implemented was an increase in the payroll tax beyond the level needed to pay current benefits, to establish and fund the SS Trust Fund which was created just for the purpose of building up reserves in anticipation of the increase in benefits payments that the retirement of the baby boomers would entail. We boomers are the pig-in-the-python demographically and the Commission (and others) recognized that provision would have to be made in advance. And so the Trust Fund was created to accumulate assets in advance for the boomer retirements at which point the Trust Fund would be exhausted and the system would revert to the pay-as-you-go status it had between 1935 and 1983.

Contrary to your claim, the funds accumulated in the Trust Fund have never been, and are still not being used, to pay out SS benefits. The special US Treasury obligations held in the Trust Fund pay interest which interest has added to the Trust Fund annually. Recently, the SSA has had to start using some of the interest received from the Trust Fund to make beneficiary payments since, after all, the boomers have started to collect as foreseen. Eventually, all of the interest will be used in this way and the Treasury obligations themselves, as they become due, will also be used to pay beneficiaries, according to the original purpose of the Trust Fund.

The Treasury obligations that the SS Trust Fund holds are not the same marketable securities as ordinary US Treasury Bonds and Bills. Nevertheless, they represent obligations of the US Govt which is the Trustee of the Trust Fund, not its owner.

It will apparently be news to you to learn that Ordinary US Treasury Bonds, the special US Treasury obligations held in the SS Trust Fund, corporate bonds, commerical paper, bank certificates of deposit, and nearly all other debt instruments are every one of them "IOUs", that is, promises to pay. The special US Treasury obligations held in the Trust Fund are, indeed, backed by the full faith and credit of the US Treasury, despite your belief to the contrary. The world bond market treats the full faith and credit of the US Treasury as the highest guarantee in the world. The use of the pejorative term "IOU" does not impugn the creditworthiness of the US govt in the least.

It's hardly a secret that the right wingers have been attacking SS and Medicare for decades. Bush would have converted SS to private stock market accounts just in time for the 2008 crash, if the American people had let him, but they didn't. If you choose to feel offended by including yourself in that number, that's up to you.

I hate to be the one to tell you this, Left Winger, but the "special bonds" in the so-called Trust Fund:

"The trust funds do not represent a legal obligation to Social Security program recipients, and Congress could cut or raise taxes on such benefits if it chooses, and are considered "intra-governmental" debt, a component of the "public" or "national" debt. As of April 2012, the intragovernmental debt was $4.8 trillion of the $15.7 trillion national debt."

LINK

You've posted enough incorrect crap, coming off as an expert who people might believe, that you should just stop posting.

The Social Security Administration disagrees with the nameless author of your wikipedia page:

Far from being "worthless IOUs," the investments held by the trust funds are backed by the full faith and credit of the U. S. Government. The government has always repaid Social Security, with interest. The special-issue securities are, therefore, just as safe as U.S. Savings Bonds or other financial instruments of the Federal government.

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/fundFAQ.html#a0=6

Once again you intone the ominous phrase "intra-governmental debt" as though that magically establishes the insolvency of the US government like the pejorative "IOUs." Well, yes, the Trust Fund contains special US govt bonds that are part of the intra-governmental debt that the US Treasury has always paid on time and regarded by the world bond market as the safest debt in the world. Safer than corporate bonds, bank CDs, commercial paper, mutual funds, etc. That is to say, safe.

Guess you didn't get the message .....OFF TOPIC, Not what OP requested....So I can only guess you are no Expert in reading!

[Langsuan Man]

I applied from Thailand using the SSA web site, but as I stated earlier you must do it on US Eastern Standard Time since they close down the web site on off hours. I did give them my magic jack (US) number and they did call me to give me some additional detailed information on exactly how much I would receive based upon which month I requested to receive my benefits. Yes, there is a slight difference based upon your start month. (every month delayed increases the amount you get) which is going to be one month later than your eligibility date since it takes a month to get the system started, even if you do apply prior to your eligibility date

Unlike most, I opted to wait until I was 66 so that I would get full social security. I do have a US address that I used and also had a US Bank account to which I had my Social Security payments made via Direct Deposit, which I might add is now a requirement since they will no longer send out checks. If you don't have a US bank account then Bangkok Bank is perfectly acceptable for the direct deposit. But as others have said the disadvantage, in my opinion, is having to go to your home branch every month to sign for your check

I think many people use the US Embassy and then the Manila Office because some individuals are not that comfortable using a computer when it comes to finances, especially when dealing with the US Government. I had no such fears and right on schedule my first social security check showed up in my US Bank account on the third Wednesday of the month, right on schedule. The week you receive your payment is dependent upon the day of the month when you are eligible, Since my birthday is on the 21st my check is issued on the third Wednesday every month

[CaptHaddock]

I applied from Thailand using the SSA web site, but as I stated earlier you must do it on US Eastern Standard Time since they close down the web site on off hours. I did give them my magic jack (US) number and they did call me to give me some additional detailed information on exactly how much I would receive based upon which month I requested to receive my benefits. Yes, there is a slight difference based upon your start month. (every month delayed increases the amount you get) which is going to be one month later than your eligibility date since it takes a month to get the system started, even if you do apply prior to your eligibility date

Unlike most, I opted to wait until I was 66 so that I would get full social security. I do have a US address that I used and also had a US Bank account to which I had my Social Security payments made via Direct Deposit, which I might add is now a requirement since they will no longer send out checks. If you don't have a US bank account then Bangkok Bank is perfectly acceptable for the direct deposit. But as others have said the disadvantage, in my opinion, is having to go to your home branch every month to sign for your check

I think many people use the US Embassy and then the Manila Office because some individuals are not that comfortable using a computer when it comes to finances, especially when dealing with the US Government. I had no such fears and right on schedule my first social security check showed up in my US Bank account on the third Wednesday of the month, right on schedule. The week you receive your payment is dependent upon the day of the month when you are eligible, Since my birthday is on the 21st my check is issued on the third Wednesday every month

I wondered whether anyone was applying online using a US address while living abroad. Seems like it could work, but there are possible complications. Is the US address an actual residence or a mail forwarding company? If the latter, then it could be spotted if the SSA cares to check against master lists of such companies. If it is a residence then is it in a no-income tax state? If not, then you could be subject to a tax domicile audit by the state in question. Did you apply for Medicare benefits at age 65? If so, and if you used the US address as your residence and if you did not sign up for Part C, D, Medigap or Medicare Advantage then if you were to repatriate you might not be able to sign up for those plans and be covered for pre-existing conditions. If you are certain that you will never live in the States again, that may not matter to you, but many of us wouldn't want to close that door.

[BKKSnowBird]

I checked on this. You can not have medicare C or D if outside the US. You can have B and pay the premium. I will keep B as a backup.

I would not use a mail forwarding address for the SSA. I use one just to keep my credit and banks open.

[Langsuan Man]

I applied from Thailand using the SSA web site, but as I stated earlier you must do it on US Eastern Standard Time since they close down the web site on off hours. I did give them my magic jack (US) number and they did call me to give me some additional detailed information on exactly how much I would receive based upon which month I requested to receive my benefits. Yes, there is a slight difference based upon your start month. (every month delayed increases the amount you get) which is going to be one month later than your eligibility date since it takes a month to get the system started, even if you do apply prior to your eligibility date

Unlike most, I opted to wait until I was 66 so that I would get full social security. I do have a US address that I used and also had a US Bank account to which I had my Social Security payments made via Direct Deposit, which I might add is now a requirement since they will no longer send out checks. If you don't have a US bank account then Bangkok Bank is perfectly acceptable for the direct deposit. But as others have said the disadvantage, in my opinion, is having to go to your home branch every month to sign for your check

I think many people use the US Embassy and then the Manila Office because some individuals are not that comfortable using a computer when it comes to finances, especially when dealing with the US Government. I had no such fears and right on schedule my first social security check showed up in my US Bank account on the third Wednesday of the month, right on schedule. The week you receive your payment is dependent upon the day of the month when you are eligible, Since my birthday is on the 21st my check is issued on the third Wednesday every month

I wondered whether anyone was applying online using a US address while living abroad. Seems like it could work, but there are possible complications. Is the US address an actual residence or a mail forwarding company? If the latter, then it could be spotted if the SSA cares to check against master lists of such companies. If it is a residence then is it in a no-income tax state? If not, then you could be subject to a tax domicile audit by the state in question. Did you apply for Medicare benefits at age 65? If so, and if you used the US address as your residence and if you did not sign up for Part C, D, Medigap or Medicare Advantage then if you were to repatriate you might not be able to sign up for those plans and be covered for pre-existing conditions. If you are certain that you will never live in the States again, that may not matter to you, but many of us wouldn't want to close that door.

I have a US residence address that I used, what is so strange about that ?

What complications are you worried about ? Most mail forwarders make it perfectly clear that you cannot use their address to declare residency (although there is one in Las Vegas that does provide that service) but once again so what !

I would hope that anyone that was applying for social security benefits would know and understand what the state laws are where they are claiming residency, especially state tax implications

The OP asked about how to apply for Social Security benefits from overseas but you seem to have a bug up your ass and want to question everything that is posted here. My personal situation is of absolutely none of your business and I am sure the OP could care less also

This is not the thread to discuss medicare, eligibility, residency, or any other such trivia. I gave detailed information on my experience in applying for Social Security Retirement benefits using the SS web portal from Thailand

When and if someone opens up a thread on Medicare I will then post my experience with that, until then, I would hope that by now you would just stay on topic.

If you have not applied for benefits from overseas why in the world are you even posting in this thread other than to try and show everyone how smart you are, since you are obviously not offering the Original Poster the information that he requested

[CaptHaddock]

I applied from Thailand using the SSA web site, but as I stated earlier you must do it on US Eastern Standard Time since they close down the web site on off hours. I did give them my magic jack (US) number and they did call me to give me some additional detailed information on exactly how much I would receive based upon which month I requested to receive my benefits. Yes, there is a slight difference based upon your start month. (every month delayed increases the amount you get) which is going to be one month later than your eligibility date since it takes a month to get the system started, even if you do apply prior to your eligibility date

Unlike most, I opted to wait until I was 66 so that I would get full social security. I do have a US address that I used and also had a US Bank account to which I had my Social Security payments made via Direct Deposit, which I might add is now a requirement since they will no longer send out checks. If you don't have a US bank account then Bangkok Bank is perfectly acceptable for the direct deposit. But as others have said the disadvantage, in my opinion, is having to go to your home branch every month to sign for your check

I think many people use the US Embassy and then the Manila Office because some individuals are not that comfortable using a computer when it comes to finances, especially when dealing with the US Government. I had no such fears and right on schedule my first social security check showed up in my US Bank account on the third Wednesday of the month, right on schedule. The week you receive your payment is dependent upon the day of the month when you are eligible, Since my birthday is on the 21st my check is issued on the third Wednesday every month

I wondered whether anyone was applying online using a US address while living abroad. Seems like it could work, but there are possible complications. Is the US address an actual residence or a mail forwarding company? If the latter, then it could be spotted if the SSA cares to check against master lists of such companies. If it is a residence then is it in a no-income tax state? If not, then you could be subject to a tax domicile audit by the state in question. Did you apply for Medicare benefits at age 65? If so, and if you used the US address as your residence and if you did not sign up for Part C, D, Medigap or Medicare Advantage then if you were to repatriate you might not be able to sign up for those plans and be covered for pre-existing conditions. If you are certain that you will never live in the States again, that may not matter to you, but many of us wouldn't want to close that door.

I have a US residence address that I used, what is so strange about that ?

What complications are you worried about ? Most mail forwarders make it perfectly clear that you cannot use their address to declare residency (although there is one in Las Vegas that does provide that service) but once again so what !

I would hope that anyone that was applying for social security benefits would know and understand what the state laws are where they are claiming residency, especially state tax implications

The OP asked about how to apply for Social Security benefits from overseas but you seem to have a bug up your ass and want to question everything that is posted here. My personal situation is of absolutely none of your business and I am sure the OP could care less also

This is not the thread to discuss medicare, eligibility, residency, or any other such trivia. I gave detailed information on my experience in applying for Social Security Retirement benefits using the SS web portal from Thailand

When and if someone opens up a thread on Medicare I will then post my experience with that, until then, I would hope that by now you would just stay on topic.

If you have not applied for benefits from overseas why in the world are you even posting in this thread other than to try and show everyone how smart you are, since you are obviously not offering the Original Poster the information that he requested

The bug seems to be up your ass, if I may say so. When you make a post suggesting that others falsely claim US residence to the SSA, as you apparently have done, you should expect questions as to whether you have thought through the implications. If that's too personal for you why would you post your activities on a public forum?

And if you imagine that you or the OP are in charge of the range of discussion in this thread or any other, then all I can say is welcome to the internet.

[willyumiii]

I applied from Thailand using the SSA web site, but as I stated earlier you must do it on US Eastern Standard Time since they close down the web site on off hours. I did give them my magic jack (US) number and they did call me to give me some additional detailed information on exactly how much I would receive based upon which month I requested to receive my benefits. Yes, there is a slight difference based upon your start month. (every month delayed increases the amount you get) which is going to be one month later than your eligibility date since it takes a month to get the system started, even if you do apply prior to your eligibility date

Unlike most, I opted to wait until I was 66 so that I would get full social security. I do have a US address that I used and also had a US Bank account to which I had my Social Security payments made via Direct Deposit, which I might add is now a requirement since they will no longer send out checks. If you don't have a US bank account then Bangkok Bank is perfectly acceptable for the direct deposit. But as others have said the disadvantage, in my opinion, is having to go to your home branch every month to sign for your check

I think many people use the US Embassy and then the Manila Office because some individuals are not that comfortable using a computer when it comes to finances, especially when dealing with the US Government. I had no such fears and right on schedule my first social security check showed up in my US Bank account on the third Wednesday of the month, right on schedule. The week you receive your payment is dependent upon the day of the month when you are eligible, Since my birthday is on the 21st my check is issued on the third Wednesday every month

I wondered whether anyone was applying online using a US address while living abroad. Seems like it could work, but there are possible complications. Is the US address an actual residence or a mail forwarding company? If the latter, then it could be spotted if the SSA cares to check against master lists of such companies. If it is a residence then is it in a no-income tax state? If not, then you could be subject to a tax domicile audit by the state in question. Did you apply for Medicare benefits at age 65? If so, and if you used the US address as your residence and if you did not sign up for Part C, D, Medigap or Medicare Advantage then if you were to repatriate you might not be able to sign up for those plans and be covered for pre-existing conditions. If you are certain that you will never live in the States again, that may not matter to you, but many of us wouldn't want to close that door.

I have a US residence address that I used, what is so strange about that ?

What complications are you worried about ? Most mail forwarders make it perfectly clear that you cannot use their address to declare residency (although there is one in Las Vegas that does provide that service) but once again so what !

I would hope that anyone that was applying for social security benefits would know and understand what the state laws are where they are claiming residency, especially state tax implications

The OP asked about how to apply for Social Security benefits from overseas but you seem to have a bug up your ass and want to question everything that is posted here. My personal situation is of absolutely none of your business and I am sure the OP could care less also

This is not the thread to discuss medicare, eligibility, residency, or any other such trivia. I gave detailed information on my experience in applying for Social Security Retirement benefits using the SS web portal from Thailand

When and if someone opens up a thread on Medicare I will then post my experience with that, until then, I would hope that by now you would just stay on topic.

If you have not applied for benefits from overseas why in the world are you even posting in this thread other than to try and show everyone how smart you are, since you are obviously not offering the Original Poster the information that he requested

Thank You!

Some people will just not stay on topic, even when you ask them to. ( please note my "signature")

Some just lack focus.

Some lack the ability or are just to lazy to start a new thread covering the off topic matter they feel compelled to interject into the thread of another.

Some are just rude and do not consider anyone else but themselves.

I agree that neither you or I ( the OP ) can control people like this...but we can ignore them.

Thanks again...

And a huge Thank you to all of those who have stayed on topic!

You have given me some great information and advice.

This is exactly what makes TV valuable to me.

The members with their heads on straight......

And the occasional comedian when appropriate!

The OP

Edited November 19, 2014 by willyumiii

[bill1369]

I have lived in Thailand about 7 years and always collected my US SS here - the checks are actually directly deposited into my BKK Bank savings account.

I have had a few questions about SS over the years and correspond with this person who works in the US SS office in Manila. He - or she - always responds to my emails promptly and gives me whatever answers I'm looking for.

[email protected]

BTW: SS sends me an annual form to fill out regarding whether or not I'm working and have income. So, based on SS mailing me every year in Thailand + my SS direct deposit to BKK Bank, I don't think there is any restriction on where you must reside to receive your SS.

However, if you have a wife who expects to receive benefits from SS after you die, you and your wife must have resided in the US 5 continuous years before your death.

Edited November 21, 2014 by bill1369

[Mike45]

I think that the 5 years of residency applies only if your wife isn't a USA citizen. If she became a citizen as quickly as she was able (3 years) then she is entitled to receive the SS on your employment history. Can anyone confirm?

[CaptHaddock]

I think that the 5 years of residency applies only if your wife isn't a USA citizen. If she became a citizen as quickly as she was able (3 years) then she is entitled to receive the SS on your employment history. Can anyone confirm?

Correct.