As we listen to the candidates’ tax plans there is one tax reform idea that
I am sure we won’t hear about; taxing Social Security. That is, doing something
to reduce the tax on Social Security. A little honesty here; this is a pet peeve
of mine. I understand the idea behind the taxability but it bothers me that
Congress set up the rules without regard for the future. The longer I practice
the greater percentage of clients I see getting taxed on their Social Security.
Calculating taxable Social Security isn’t straight forward. The amount a
taxpayer is taxed on depends of the income on the return. Basically, if half of
the Social Security received and all the rest of the income on the return is
less than $32,000 for a couple filing jointly, $25,000 for everyone else (one
exception), then the Social Security is not taxable. Above that, taxability
phases in up to a maximum of 85% taxability. Since this is the tax code we’re
talking about, the actual calculations are not as simple as it sounds. There is
some excluded income that has to be added into the calculation. And if the
taxpayer is filing Married Filing Separate but lived even one day with their
spouse, they go to 85% taxability and skip the phase in. You get the picture.
There are some special problems with taxability of Social Security benefits.
The first is that they can be taxed on more than was actually received. The
taxable amount is figured on the total amount credited to the taxpayer and that
includes attorney fees and Workman’s’ Comp pay back. I have also seen where
gambling winnings have triggered taxable Social Security. While the client may
have losses to offset gambling income, they are still stuck paying taxes on the
Social Security. Also, if you receive a lump sum that includes back years
benefits, there are some special calculations that might reduce the taxability.
Please talk to your tax preparer. There is also a “marriage penalty” aspect to
this process. As mentioned above, a single taxpayer won’t pay tax on their
Social Security until half their benefits and all the rest of their income is
over $25,000. But a married couple only gets an extra $7000 in income before
they start paying on their Social Security. A second taxpayer receiving Social Security
could trigger taxability for a couple.
However, my biggest problem with taxing Social Security is there has never
been an adjustment for inflation. When I started preparing taxes in 1988, I
seldom saw taxable Social Security. Benefits were much lower and few retirees
worked or had large pensions to trigger taxability. Now, it is rare to not have
taxable Social Security. I’d like to see the thresholds tied to inflation but
with the deficit and other tax issues, I don’t see this happening.
If it looks as if you will have taxable Social Security, you might want to
set up withholding from SSA, up the withholding from another source or make
estimate payments to keep from an underpayment of estimated tax penalty. Yes,
you can have Social Security withhold for Federal. It’s a set percentage; 7%,
10% or 15%, your choice. It may not cover all the tax but it’s a start.
The good news is that many states don’t tax Social Security benefits. In
Kansas, if the Federal Adjusted Gross Income is less than $75,000, the taxable
Social Security is subtracted from the Federal income. Unfortunately, if the
income is above $75,000, there is no deduction. Oklahoma, however, allows
taxpayers to deduct all the taxable Social Security no matter how much income
is involved. Check with your state for their policy.
Retirement should be a time of relaxation and not stress about taxes. The
best idea is to check with your tax professional about what you can do to
protect yourself from tax surprises. And make sure that they are taking taxable
Social Security into consideration. Just don’t expect it to be an issue in the
election or tax reform. It brings in too much money.
McIntire
Tax Center - on Facebook
- on Google+ - or Twitter @ mactax.