I think I could write a column every day from now until the end of this month with a headline that screams: DON'T PANIC ABOUT THE ALLEGED APRIL 30 SOCIAL SECURITY DEADLINE! — and people would still be panicking.

At least, that's what my emails are telling me. It seems as though half of the senior citizens in this country think they have to do something in the next several weeks with their Social Security or they risk losing untold thousands of dollars in benefits.

Apparently, I can't repeat this message often enough: The April 30 filing deadline applies to only a very small handful of people who are not yet getting Social Security benefits and who are already 66 or will be turning 66 soon and who want to employ the file and suspend strategy discussed endlessly in this column. I've spent the last two columns explaining who those folks are.

And I will spend the rest of this column answering emails to help explain who those folks are not. In other words, these emails come from people who are examples of the vast majority of Social Security beneficiaries, or soon-to-be beneficiaries, to whom the April 30 deadline is meaningless.

Q: I am 74. My wife is 72. We have been getting our Social Security benefits for about 10 years now. We keep hearing reports in the news that we have to take some action by April 30 or we might lose some of our Social Security. What do we have to do?

A: You do not have to do anything. If you are already getting Social Security benefits, the April 30 deadline has absolutely nothing to do with you. You will continue to get your Social Security benefits for the rest of your life.

Q: My wife and I are both 71 and getting Social Security. We got a mailer that said if we contact our local Social Security office by April 30, we can get an extra $15,000 added to our Social Security benefits over the coming years. What is that all about?

A: It's all about nothing! There are no extra Social Security benefits payable to current Social Security recipients — not now, not by April 30, and not in the future. Shame on the folks spreading this misinformation with misleading come-ons and advertisements in the mail and in the media.

Q: I went to a seminar last night put on by a Social Security broker. He told me that I only have one more month in which to sign up for Social Security benefits. I told him that I intended to apply for my widow's benefits when I retire at age 64 in September and that I planned to save my own benefits until age 70. He told me I can't do that. These are his exact words. He said: "That whole kibosh went out the window a couple months ago." Was he right?

A: I don't know what a "Social Security broker" is. But I can tell you whatever he is, he's a bad one! The advice he gave you is dead wrong.

When he talks about the "whole kibosh going out the window," I am sure he is referring to a loophole-closing law passed last year eliminating some so-called Social Security maximizing strategies. The opportunity to use one of those strategies, called file and suspend, does end on April 30. And a more useful strategy called file and restrict continues for another four years. (See last week's column for more information about all of this.)

But the filing strategies that widows and widowers can employ were NOT impacted by the closed loophole law. And one of those strategies says you can file for reduced widow's benefits when you turn 64 (or any age before age 66), and then switch to your own full retirement benefit when you are 70, and get a 32 percent delayed retirement bonus added to your monthly checks.

Q: I was planning to file for benefits on my ex-husband's Social Security record in a few months. I will be 66 in July, and he is 64 years old. He is not yet getting Social Security himself. Based on columns you've written in the past, I was led to believe that I could get benefits on his record even though he hasn't filed for benefits. But a financial planner told me that new rules passed by Congress prevent me from getting any of my husband's Social Security until he actually files for benefits. If he is right, can you explain the new rules to me?

A: Your financial planner is wrong. He is misinterpreting what the changes to the file and suspend law mean. In a nutshell, the aforementioned loophole-closing law says this: If a retiree suspends (or isn't getting) Social Security benefits, then that retiree's spouse can't get benefits either. Many people have misinterpreted that law to say that divorced women like you cannot get benefits from an ex-husband's Social Security account until he actually applies for benefits.

But the law has always granted an exception to divorcees, and the exception still applies, even with the new rules. So you can file for one half of your husband's Social Security when you turn 66 in July, and then when you turn 70, you can file for 132 percent of your own retirement benefits.

By the way, what you are trying to do is called the file and restrict strategy. In other words, you are waiting until age 66 to file for Social Security, but you are restricting your application to divorced spousal benefits only (again, saving your own until a later date). The loophole-closing law mentioned earlier will shut down the file and restrict strategy, but not until 2020. So you are not bound by the April 30 deadline, which applies only to the closing of the file and suspend loophole.

If you have a Social Security question, Tom Margenau has the answer. Contact him at [email protected]. To find out more about Tom Margenau and to read past columns and see features from other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.