The survivor benefit isn't a "fee." It's life insurance you buy with your pension, and here's the actual price tag.

[FERS Ready]

Talked through the survivor-benefit decision with a controller friend this week, and it's such a quietly huge one that I ran the whole thing in fersready.com to see it in real dollars.

Call her Dana. ATC, retiring at 52, married, high-3 about $165K. Her full pension before any election is $5,147 a month.

Elect full FERS survivor and OPM trims 10% off for life. Her check goes to $4,632 a month. That's $515 a month she gives up, for good.

In return: if she passes first, her spouse keeps $2,573 a month ($30,881 a year) for the rest of their life, with COLAs. Skip the survivor benefit and that number is $0 the day she dies. (And the spouse can lose FEHB coverage too, since staying on the plan is tied to receiving a survivor annuity.)

Here's the trap. While Dana's alive, "no survivor" always looks better. Across her retirement it's about $683 a month more take-home and roughly $319,825 more in total. But that whole surplus is only "ahead" if you ignore what happens to her spouse after she's gone. It isn't free money. It's the premium on a lifetime of survivor income.

I'm not telling anyone which way to go. Just this: run it in dollars before you sign, because the counter makes it sound like a small percentage, and it's really a six-figure decision. 🙏
Estimates based on current law and the inputs shown, not financial advice. Run your own numbers and confirm with OPM/SSA before making a decision.

Full worked reports, both elections:
• Full survivor:
• No survivor:

Did you take full, partial, or no survivor? And knowing what you know now, would you pick the same again?

 

[JackTBP]

View attachment 10270
Talked through the survivor-benefit decision with a controller friend this week, and it's such a quietly huge one that I ran the whole thing in fersready.com to see it in real dollars.

Call her Dana. ATC, retiring at 52, married, high-3 about $165K. Her full pension before any election is $5,147 a month.

Elect full FERS survivor and OPM trims 10% off for life. Her check goes to $4,632 a month. That's $515 a month she gives up, for good.

In return: if she passes first, her spouse keeps $2,573 a month ($30,881 a year) for the rest of their life, with COLAs. Skip the survivor benefit and that number is $0 the day she dies. (And the spouse can lose FEHB coverage too, since staying on the plan is tied to receiving a survivor annuity.)

Here's the trap. While Dana's alive, "no survivor" always looks better. Across her retirement it's about $683 a month more take-home and roughly $319,825 more in total. But that whole surplus is only "ahead" if you ignore what happens to her spouse after she's gone. It isn't free money. It's the premium on a lifetime of survivor income.

I'm not telling anyone which way to go. Just this: run it in dollars before you sign, because the counter makes it sound like a small percentage, and it's really a six-figure decision. 🙏
Estimates based on current law and the inputs shown, not financial advice. Run your own numbers and confirm with OPM/SSA before making a decision.

Full worked reports, both elections:
• Full survivor:
• No survivor:

Did you take full, partial, or no survivor? And knowing what you know now, would you pick the same again?

For my situation, I’m in favor of doing the partial survivor benefit, “split the difference.” Surviving spouse can keep their FEHB (huge in my situation) and they get some monetary benefit every month, and less taken off the annuity while you’re still alive.

 

[the inquirer]

So then when I am close to retirement, I should just get a quote for life insurance say for 30 year term. If it’s only 200 a month, then it’s a win. What yall think?

 

[KP-ATC]

So then when I am close to retirement, I should just get a quote for life insurance say for 30 year term. If it’s only 200 a month, then it’s a win. What yall think?

I think life insurance is generally a scam.

 

[the inquirer]

I think life insurance is generally a scam.

How so? Like they try to find some caveat not to pay out?