I have applied for my retirement benefits in November. My application is still in process. I understand that eventually they will pay retroactively whatever accumulates since November. Without any interest. Thus, the OP question.

No. As you pointed out, benefit payouts are mandated by statute. The bigger question is: is it in your best interest to start taking benefits at this point or at a later time.

3 hours ago, LuckyR said:

No.

I don't see, why. If I started receiving the money in November, I would invest it and start accumulating interest. Instead, the money is in "their" bank for months.

3 hours ago, LuckyR said:

benefit payouts are mandated by statute

I don't see what it has to do with the question.

3 hours ago, LuckyR said:

The bigger question is: is it in your best interest to start taking benefits at this point or at a later time.

I know the answer to this question.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/social-security-fairness-act-signed-by-president-biden/

Are you eligible for more money after Biden signed the Social Security Fairness Act? Those bonuses are retroactive back to December 2023. 

18 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/social-security-fairness-act-signed-by-president-biden/

Are you eligible for more money after Biden signed the Social Security Fairness Act? Those bonuses are retroactive back to December 2023. 

Thank you.

I don't think I am eligible. I never worked in public sector or received a public pension.

The US had a baby boom after WW2.  Which lasted until 1964.  Because of this, there are many more people now reaching the age to collect SS.  Processing applications is thus extra slow, going through our federal bureaucracy.  Payments to you are made from people who are presently paying in to social security, not from the money you paid in years ago.  The working people currently paying money in, some of that goes towards your SS payment, and the rest into the SS trust fund.  If I understand it correctly, if you end up waiting a little longer for your first payment, it will be slightly larger, in compensation for you receiving benefits for fewer total months of retirement.  

3 minutes ago, TheVat said:

if you end up waiting a little longer for your first payment, it will be slightly larger

It is fine if it is in fact so. However, I understood from SSA documents that the payment amount is determined by the month I've applied for it rather than by the first month I received it. Maybe I've misunderstood this point.

21 minutes ago, Genady said:

It is fine if it is in fact so. However, I understood from SSA documents that the payment amount is determined by the month I've applied for it rather than by the first month I received it. Maybe I've misunderstood this point.

Or I have.  I am not sure which way this works.  Also I don't know what proportion of your payment is from the SS trust funds (which accrue interest) and what is from incoming payments (which don't, I would guess).  I wonder how "transparent" our government really ever is, on such matters.  🙂

5 minutes ago, TheVat said:

Or I have.  I am not sure which way this works.  Also I don't know what proportion of your payment is from the SS trust funds (which accrue interest) and what is from incoming payments (which don't, I would guess).  I wonder how "transparent" our government really ever is, on such matters.  🙂

I will know the answer when I will see the payment amount.

The interest earned by holding on to your money is vey small.

Most government paperwork takes time, especially if understaffed from budget starvation. Why would this be any different?

Hanlon’s Razor probably applies: never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by neglect, ignorance or incompetence

17 minutes ago, swansont said:

The interest earned by holding on to your money is vey small.

Most government paperwork takes time, especially if understaffed from budget starvation. Why would this be any different?

Hanlon’s Razor probably applies: never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by neglect, ignorance or incompetence

This might be also a factor: SSA has assigned my application to their regional office in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, which probably operates on an "island time." 🙂

3 hours ago, Genady said:

This might be also a factor: SSA has assigned my application to their regional office in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, which probably operates on an "island time." 🙂

No doubt a possible factor.

I know that processing out when I retired had months of lead time, and it was probably 6-7 months from putting in paperwork until they got the disbursements right. (4 before and 3 after. They start with a guess to get the retirement pay flowing, then adjust when they finalize the numbers) The system still consults paper files and there’s always a backlog. I imagine the SSA has similar issues.

I had a comparable experience when I joined the navy. “placeholder” pay for a while until I was in the system and the numbers got properly crunched.

24 minutes ago, swansont said:

The system still consults paper files

I have had a paper related "glitch" with SSA, when they notified me that in their system, I am a non-citizen. They asked to send them the original naturalization certificate, which is almost impossible to replace, and promised to promptly send it back. It was in the beginning of 2020. A week after I mailed the certificate, the COVID shutdown started, and they could not access their mailroom. They have updated their system eventually, and I did get my certificate back... more than two years later.

On 1/6/2025 at 3:25 AM, Genady said:

I don't see, why. If I started receiving the money in November, I would invest it and start accumulating interest. Instead, the money is in "their" bank for months.

Well, the average monthly payout is $1975, the average bank interest rate is 0.42%, so we're talking about 69¢ a month. That's why I said: "no".

4 hours ago, LuckyR said:

Well, the average monthly payout is $1975, the average bank interest rate is 0.42%, so we're talking about 69¢ a month. That's why I said: "no".

Ah, but your original explanation was different, i.e.,

On 1/6/2025 at 3:45 AM, LuckyR said:

benefit payouts are mandated by statute.

 

9 hours ago, LuckyR said:

the average bank interest rate is 0.42%

Depends if it’s a savings or a checking account and whether it’s a bank or credit union and whether local, national, or global institution 

2 hours ago, iNow said:

Depends if it’s a savings or a checking account and whether it’s a bank or credit union and whether local, national, or global institution 

Moreover, the new issue CD for a month today gives 4.2% yield. It's $7 a month on $2000 deposit.

4 hours ago, Genady said:

Moreover, the new issue CD for a month today gives 4.2% yield. It's $7 a month on $2000 deposit.

Uummm... I'm not invoking government conspiracy for $7.

4 minutes ago, LuckyR said:

Uummm... I'm not invoking government conspiracy for $7.

What conspiracy? What $7?

The update on the issue: none. More than three months later, my application is still pending. All attempts to get a hint from SSA on why it takes so long, failed.

SSA in the US tells me to contact their office in DR. A phone message in their office in DR plays for 9-10 minutes and then disconnects.

Awaiting their email response, for two weeks now...

The OP question should be changed to "Is it in the interest of SSA not to delay processing of applications for benefits?"

The worker buyouts and layoffs in the federal government are really not helping.  Also, the forcing of telecommuting staff back into the offices will probably cause some disruptions in work.  

There's also a hiring freeze at SSA, and new legislation, the Social Security Fairness Act, which is slowing things down.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/social-security-administration-ssa-social-security-fairness-law/

 

Quote

Ongoing staffing shortages, compounded by a hiring freeze since November 2024, will make the task of servicing people "more difficult," SSA stated. All Social Security recipients, including those not affected by the new law, will face delays and increased wait times as SSA contends with the new workload, according to the agency.

 

48 minutes ago, TheVat said:

The worker buyouts and layoffs in the federal government are really not helping.  Also, the forcing of telecommuting staff back into the offices will probably cause some disruptions in work.  

There's also a hiring freeze at SSA, and new legislation, the Social Security Fairness Act, which is slowing things down.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/social-security-administration-ssa-social-security-fairness-law/

 

 

Thank you, Paul. This was helpful.

This article is about an SSA employee of 35 years being pushed out and then discovering her retirement package has been reduced, by the "big beautiful bill":

NPR

She served the American people for 35 years. Now her reti...

As part of Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill," the House voted to end a retirement supplement aimed at helping federal employees who retire before they're 62.

Santa Maria, who voted for Trump in the 2024 election, says she'd hoped that his Department of Government Efficiency would bring technical expertise and upgrades to the Social Security Administration.

"But what they're doing now is just eliminating the people and leaving the rest with the outdated computer system," she says.

And now, with part of her retirement on the chopping block, she's even more disappointed...

It is always the workers at the bottom that pay the price - short term - for poor management decisions.

Conversely it is easier for management to cut costs by cutting staf and/or salaries than by doing something to upset the customer.

If the management keeps on making unwise decisions then it is the organisation that also suffers - long term.

Edited June 12Jun 12 by studiot