Switching Social Security

OK, here's what to do:

Don't pay taxes on the SS money you get -- it'll probably be a few years for the gummint to catch on. So, then, when you get audited, you say:

"What, that money? Oh, I paid all that back!"

[perinova]

Interesting scheme however: Think about it - if you can give back the money to the SSA it means you can also keep the capital invested instead. It is way better than giving it back.
Did any of you ever compute when it is best to draw SS. Well even though the payments are lower at 62 if you invest that money at ~7% you come out ahead at any age you die before 120. Try to plug in other age of death and investment return you will find out it is "usually" better to get your check early and putting the money to work.
I say usually because if returns are low it might be better to wait to age 67. Age 70 NEVER seem to be a good idea whatever the return you are expecting above.

We've discussed this before. My conclusion is the taking it at age 62 is a no-brainer.

[mathjak107]

62 is a no brainer depending on spouses situation...if spouse will be financially set than the reduced payment is okay,but if spouse may be hurt financiall you are better off waiting

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by perinova Age 70 NEVER seem to be a good idea whatever the return you are expecting above.

Why? the increment between age 67 and 70 is as larger or larger than the increment between 62 and FRT, whatever one's FRT is. It seems to me that it is seamless, or as in my case, actually a bigger boost after FRT than before.

Ha

[Michael Moore]

Keep in mind that the Handbook is not a definitive source:

http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/handbook/...k-preface.html

"In case of a conflict between the contents of the Handbook and the Act, Regulations, and Rulings, the latter take precedence. "

As far as any back taxes that might be due, you get to deal with IRS on that, not SSA since the IRS is the tax collecting arm of the Federal government. I'd be curious if IRS might decide to do a general audit of the individual's taxes for the period.

cheers,
Michael

[Jarhead*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by REWahoo! Kid, this is the third time you've told us to call SS.* You are the one saying this is "legit", why don't you call them and confirm?

ReWahoo: You're going to have to do a better job in screening out potential laggards in this group. (Hope old Sundance follows up on this, or we'll never know.)

By the way, the Kings stole one from the Spurs on Friday. Any magic left? Find out in about an hour. (No wagers though).

[Gail]

Publication 17 addresses the issue of repaying prior benefits that are in excess of your current yearly benefit amount. I can't cut and paste right now, but the general idea is that you can take the repayment as an itemized deduction. You do not file amended returns for the prior years.

[Sundance Kid]

Jarhead:

If you're referring to me, as a laggard. I think that's a pretty cheap shot!!!

My apologies, IF I read you wrong!

I stand by my original post. Others have agreed, to some degree, that it can be
done. I would think, that anyone interested in this subject could rely upon their own abilities, to at least contact their SSA office. I'm not argueing the merits of
this idea; I'm merely stating that I've read that it can be done.

[Jarhead*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sundance Kid Jarhead: If you're referring to me, as a laggard.* I think that's a pretty cheap shot!!! My apologies, IF I read you wrong! I stand by my original post.* Others have agreed, to some degree, that it can be done.* I would think, that anyone interested in this subject could rely upon their own abilities, to at least contact their SSA office.* I'm not argueing the merits of this idea; I'm merely stating that I've read that it can be done.

Sundance: You read it wrong. (Just having my idea of fun with ReWahoo).

[MJ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarhead* ReWahoo: You're going to have to do a better job in screening out potential laggards in this group. (Hope old Sundance follows up on this, or we'll never know.)

Sundance, lighten up, that's what the smileys were for. :

[Sundance Kid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vagabond Sundance, lighten up, that's what the smileys were for. :

My BAD!! Sorry!

[REWahoo]

Sundance, you are going to have to forgive Jarhead for his occasional conduct on the forum. I suspect he was drunk last night when he posted that remark…not from imbibing alcohol, but from the success of the Kings in evening up the series with the Spurs.

[Eagle43]

Quote:

Originally Posted by REWahoo! Sundance, you are going to have to forgive Jarhead for his occasional conduct on the forum.* I suspect he was drunk last night when he posted that remark…not from imbibing alcohol, but from the success of the Kings in evening up the series with the Spurs.

You would bring the Kings up.... Grrrrr! Oh well, if they should beat the Spurs, the Mavericks cruise to the Finals. No wagers, pluheeeese.

Jarhead, you don't drink, do you? I mean, you can't sink one in the hole if you're in the tank!

[Jarhead*]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eagle43 You would bring the Kings up.... Grrrrr!* Oh well, if they should beat the Spurs, the Mavericks cruise to the Finals. No wagers, pluheeeese. Jarhead, you don't drink, do you? I mean, you can't sink one in the hole if you're in the tank!* *

Eagle43:* Going into the playoffs, (considering the records of both clubs), the only thing I asked of the Kings, is at least keep it interesting.

After the first nights drubbing of the Kings, I have to admit, that didn't appear likely.

The last 3 games haven't disappointed.

Regarding drinking: The days of sitting out on the patio, and pounding down beers during half-time, and after the game, with my "Buds", has been over for a long, long, time.

I did fix my wife and I a Gin and Tonic after the game last night.

Just keep it entertaining, for the next few games is all I ask.

[Dawg52]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarhead* Regarding drinking: The days of sitting out on the patio, and pounding down beers during half-time, and after the game, with my "Buds", has been over for a long, long, time. I did fix my wife and I a Gin and Tonic after the game last night. Just keep it entertaining, is all I ask.

You don't play the 19th hole? * That's my favorite hole on the course!*

[Martha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gail Publication 17 addresses the issue of repaying prior benefits that are in excess of your current yearly benefit amount. I can't cut and paste right now, but the general idea is that you can take the repayment as an itemized deduction. You do not file amended returns for the prior years.

Here is the link: http://www.irs.gov/publications/p17/ch11.html#d0e29539

[obryanjf]

Ok,

Here is the response i got back from Ray's team.* I'm a bit suprised I got a response.*

job

We have talked about it from time to time. If a person takes their social security benefit prior to Normal Retirement Age (NRA), the benefit is reduced for the rest of the recipient’s life.* For most people, the discount for taking the benefit at age 62 is between 20% and 30%.* If someone starts taking the benefit early, the Social Security Administration (SSA) does allow a person to pay back all the money they have received and “Re-Set” the benefit to the new age as if that was the original starting date.* The SSA does not require you to pay it back with interest, just the cumulative amount received.

The person it works for is someone who expects to live into their 80’s and can afford to pay back the cumulative payments.* To do this you would have to contact the SSA and ask for the appropriate forms.* Then the SSA would have to accept the repayment.

Rick Plum, CFP

"The Professor"
Director of Financial Planning
The Raymond J. Lucia Companies, Inc.

[poocher]

A reader of the Andrew Tobias financial column on 4/10/06 contributed this:

"Collect benefits at age 62, but at age 65, withdraw the Social Security claim, pay back all Social Security benefits received, and resubmit a claim for maximum benefits.
I chose that second option. Worked real well for me, especially the income tax deduction I got for Social Security income I had paid taxes on in prior years. This amount went straight to ‘miscellaneous adjustments’ on the Itemized Deduction sheet.”

The tax treatment was not further verified or discussed, but indicates at least one way someone handled it. AndrewTobias.com has archives in case anyone wants more context.
Poocher