Comments On This Topic

  1. I recently lost a loved one who died on January 27. She received her January benefits in February as is the normal process for each and every Social Security recipient. Those funds were a portion of the what paid for her final expenses. Social Security made a demand to the bank to return those benefits. We scrambled to make that happen. This is UNJUST. A person that lives for any part of a month , benefits that are paid for that month should not be required to be returned. Who at AMAC can help promote a change in this policy? I have already reached out to Congressman Amodeii, Senator Catherine Cortez Masto and Nevada Representative Steven Horsford who is actually on the Ways and Means Committee which deals with issues associated with Social Security. I am in communication with them and also sent a letter to President Biden regarding the matter. I behoove you to look in to this unjust matter. Both my husband and myself called independently to Social Security and got the same answer. PLEASE do something to fix this UNJUST procedure

    • Annette,
      What you are referring to is the so-called “claw back” rule which has been Federal law for decades. Essentially, benefits of any kind must be full entitled before those benefits are paid and, for Social Security, that means a person must live for the entire month in order to be eligible for SS benefits for that month. That means that if your loved one died on the 27th of the month, she wasn’t entitled to Social Security benefits for the month in which she died, which is why Social Security has instructed the bank to return those funds. The bank doesn’t really have a choice in this matter; they are obligated to follow Federal law, which requires them to return that payment, and any subsequent SS payments received for that individual, directly to Social Security. Although you may feel this is unjust and have written to many objecting, this is not something that can be changed without Congressional legislation to do so, a highly doubtful prospect. AMAC is a strong proponent of reforming Social Security to ensure its solvency for generations to come and actively promotes such broad legislation in Washington D.C. I will pass your concerns on to AMAC management who evaluate which Social Security issues to support, and they will review your concerns about the “claw back” rule in the context of broader Social Security reform.
      Russell Gloor
      National Social Security Advisor
      The AMAC Foundation

  2. The fact sheet would be more realistic if it included women, race, age groups (62, 66+4mos, & 70.). The fact sheet is akin to an educational tool. Please educate.

    • BJ:

      Thank you for your comments. Your observations are appropriate, but should be directed to the Social Security Administration at The SSA is responsible for the document you’re referring to, and in fact, is responsible for releasing this information to the public. The AMAC Foundation is a nonprofit, public benefit corporation, and our Advisory Service is dedicated to helping Americans understand and navigate the Social Security System, and is not affiliated with the SSA or any other governmental agency.

      Gerry Hafer
      AMAC Foundation, Inc.

What's Your Opinion?

We welcome your comments. Join the discussion and let your voice be heard. All fields are required

Website by Geiger Computers