Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Taking Social Security at 62 - Point to Ponder
Old 06-09-2013, 08:28 AM   #1
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
freebird5825's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Nowhere, 43N Latitude, NY
Posts: 9,017
Taking Social Security at 62 - Point to Ponder

Hi again, Hi again. Well it is that time for me - turning 62 in August. Now EVERYBODY tells me "grab it at 62 - do the math - you will have to live to about 77-80 to make up the difference on what you are giving up not taking it early.

Uhh huh and good point. However I recently read an opinion for a CFP on this issue. "If you NEED the income then take it. However if you don't need it and are just going to let it sit in the bank consider this. For every year you don't take it at 62, Social Security grows at an annual rate of about 8%. It is kind of like investing your money at an 8% growth rate per annum. If you are just going to let it sit in a Savings Account, CD or Money Market earning the current .75 or 1 percent you are better off letting it sit growing at 8%. That is unless of courses you can find a better investment vehicle for it that can generate an annual return of 8 % or better. Plus remember the approx 8% growth SS generates is tax free growth. Thoughts Mr. B
__________________

__________________
"All our dreams can come true, if we have the courage to pursue them." - Walt Disney
freebird5825 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 06-09-2013, 08:32 AM   #2
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,070
Uh, Mr. B, having your very own account on this board is very inexpensive. Why not take a couple of minutes to set one up for yourself rather than confuse us by piggy-backing on freebird?
__________________

__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 08:53 AM   #3
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
travelover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 9,871
Hi Mr. B. This topic has been discussed in detail here recently in these threads.

Case for taking SS early (62)?

Age of First Claim for Social Security!
__________________
Yes, I have achieved work / life balance.
travelover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 09:01 AM   #4
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
obgyn65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: midwestern city
Posts: 4,061
To answer the OP's question : there is a break even point around age 66-68. That's when I plan to take social security in my FIRE planning, if I make it until that age.
__________________
Very conservative with investments. Not ER'd yet, 48 years old. Please do not take anything I write or imply as legal, financial or medical advice directed to you. Contact your own financial advisor, healthcare provider, or attorney for financial, medical and legal advice.
obgyn65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 12:08 PM   #5
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
OAG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Central, Ohio, USA
Posts: 2,598
Don't know but I looked and looked at this issue for a long time a few years ago and the only thing I could determine for sure is "it depends". It can be different for almost everyone. FYI I did take it at 62 but then paid it back at 67 then took it again at 67.5 years of age (an option no longer available). So I just about split the difference (original eligibility was 65 and 7 months). There are several factors to consider the least of which are Taxation of Benefits, Taxation of RMD's on IRA's and resulting Taxation of Benefits, Martial Status and who earned the greatest SS Benefit and the age difference between spouses, and on and on. Now at 73.5 years of Age I think I made the correct decision but who knows?
__________________
Vietnam Veteran, CW4 USA, Retired 1979
OAG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 12:24 PM   #6
Administrator
W2R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 38,824
Quote:
Originally Posted by REWahoo View Post
Uh, Mr. B, having your very own account on this board is very inexpensive. Why not take a couple of minutes to set one up for yourself rather than confuse us by piggy-backing on freebird?
+1 Although your posts are always welcome either way, this would make things a lot easier for those reading your posts and it's easy to do!

As for SS? Personally I decided to take my SS at 70 for the reasons your CFP suggests, and simply because of the SPIA annuity-like aspects of SS. I want to have enough guaranteed direct deposited income each month in my old age to cover my monthly bills.

But others differ, and really, I think SS has enough of a handle on life expectancy that it is a toss-up. I don't think there is necessarily a wrong answer to the question of when to claim SS.
__________________
Already we are boldly launched upon the deep; but soon we shall be lost in its unshored, harbourless immensities.

- - H. Melville, 1851
W2R is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 01:05 PM   #7
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,862
Definitely consider your SS as part of a couple (unless Mr B is just an honorific!). The surviving spouse gets the larger of either spouse's benefit if both are eligible. That means the largest SS benefit will end only after both spouses are gone. The smallest benefit ends when the first spouse dies. Is your SS benefit potentially the largest or smallest?

Then there are the spousal benefits while both are living. Generally when you hit full retirement age and your spouse has claimed (or filed and suspended) benefits, you might want to claim a spousal benefit of 50% of the spouse's FRA benefit. By doing it after FRA, you'll be able to claim your full benefit (if larger) at 70 or whenever. So that's a possible extra few years of benefits for free. Look up the rules, since I may have got something wrong there.

Other than the usual individual decision, those are the two big things couples need to consider.
__________________
Animorph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 05:44 PM   #8
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
freebird5825's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Nowhere, 43N Latitude, NY
Posts: 9,017
Hey kids...I will make sure that Mr B will create his own profile and log in on his own.

Sorry for the confusion.

Feel free to bust chops on him the same way you do for me.

Are we good ?
__________________
"All our dreams can come true, if we have the courage to pursue them." - Walt Disney
freebird5825 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 05:49 PM   #9
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,070
Quote:
Originally Posted by freebird5825 View Post
Are we good ?
I'll give you mediocre, but I'm not sure I could go with good...
__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 06:00 PM   #10
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
freebird5825's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Nowhere, 43N Latitude, NY
Posts: 9,017
Bronx cheer

TY everyone for helping Mr B out in the other thread.
__________________
"All our dreams can come true, if we have the courage to pursue them." - Walt Disney
freebird5825 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 06:18 PM   #11
Moderator
MichaelB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rocky Inlets
Posts: 24,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by freebird5825 View Post

Feel free to bust chops on him the same way you do for me.
Amazing you have survived, all the abuse you get around here.
__________________
MichaelB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 06:27 PM   #12
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
freebird5825's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Nowhere, 43N Latitude, NY
Posts: 9,017
I live for it !


__________________
"All our dreams can come true, if we have the courage to pursue them." - Walt Disney
freebird5825 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 07:57 PM   #13
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by freebird5825 View Post
Hi again, Hi again. Well it is that time for me - turning 62 in August. Now EVERYBODY tells me "grab it at 62 - do the math - you will have to live to about 77-80 to make up the difference on what you are giving up not taking it early.

Uhh huh and good point. However I recently read an opinion for a CFP on this issue. "If you NEED the income then take it. However if you don't need it and are just going to let it sit in the bank consider this. For every year you don't take it at 62, Social Security grows at an annual rate of about 8%. It is kind of like investing your money at an 8% growth rate per annum. If you are just going to let it sit in a Savings Account, CD or Money Market earning the current .75 or 1 percent you are better off letting it sit growing at 8%. That is unless of courses you can find a better investment vehicle for it that can generate an annual return of 8 % or better. Plus remember the approx 8% growth SS generates is tax free growth. Thoughts Mr. B
I'm in favor of deferring. I'm 65 and I haven't started benefits yet.

But, the CFP is seriously confused. Deferring isn't at all like investing at an 8% growth rate. It's like buying a CPI-adjusted SPIA that pays somwhere between 6.7% and 8.3% of your premium. That's not an annual "return", as mentioned on many annuity threads.

Many people who post here have done the numbers. I'll do it again: if my annual SS benefit is $10,000 at age 62, it will be $10,667 if I defer for one year. I give up $10,000 to get a stream of CPI-adjusted payments that start at $667.

The actual IRR on that money depends on how long I live.
If I live to 73, I will have earned CPI - 5%
If I live to 77, I will have earned CPI + 0%
If I live to 82, I will have earned CPI + 3%
If I live to 91, I will have earned CPI + 5%

I don't see any 8% on that list.

(Deferring the next year - to 64 - is more attractive. Having a spouse who may get benefits from my work history is more complicated.)
__________________
Independent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 11:55 PM   #14
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Independent View Post
I'm in favor of deferring. I'm 65 and I haven't started benefits yet.

But, the CFP is seriously confused. Deferring isn't at all like investing at an 8% growth rate. It's like buying a CPI-adjusted SPIA that pays somwhere between 6.7% and 8.3% of your premium. That's not an annual "return", as mentioned on many annuity threads.

Many people who post here have done the numbers. I'll do it again: if my annual SS benefit is $10,000 at age 62, it will be $10,667 if I defer for one year. I give up $10,000 to get a stream of CPI-adjusted payments that start at $667.

The actual IRR on that money depends on how long I live.
If I live to 73, I will have earned CPI - 5%
If I live to 77, I will have earned CPI + 0%
If I live to 82, I will have earned CPI + 3%
If I live to 91, I will have earned CPI + 5%

I don't see any 8% on that list.

(Deferring the next year - to 64 - is more attractive. Having a spouse who may get benefits from my work history is more complicated.)
Great comments and explanation!
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 06:02 PM   #15
Dryer sheet wannabe
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 11
Has anybody used any of those services for about $40 that design a plan on the most effective approach to taking SS? With a spouse and differences in payouts and differences in age, the calculations can be quite difficult. I used to thing that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. However, that is quite a simplistic approach. The 50% spouse rule can make quite a difference in total $ you get.
__________________
WWDog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 10:20 AM   #16
Recycles dryer sheets
padlin00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by WWDog View Post
Has anybody used any of those services for about $40 that design a plan on the most effective approach to taking SS? With a spouse and differences in payouts and differences in age, the calculations can be quite difficult. I used to thing that a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. However, that is quite a simplistic approach. The 50% spouse rule can make quite a difference in total $ you get.
Yes, Social Security Choices recommend... Wife starts at her FRA 66+, I start spousal at my FRA of 66+. At 70 I put in for my benefit and wife changes to Spousal at that time. The figures seem to work out correctly.

My PIA is 2500
Wife's PIA is 950
Wife is 11 months older then I
HUSBAND: Normal planning horizon 82 years
WIFE: Long planning horizon 92 years

Sent PM
__________________
padlin00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 12:22 PM   #17
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
packrat44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: near Canadian border and near Mexican border
Posts: 1,142
Quote:
Originally Posted by padlin00 View Post
Yes, Social Security Choices recommend... Wife starts at her FRA 66+, I start spousal at my FRA of 66+. At 70 I put in for my benefit and wife changes to Spousal at that time. The figures seem to work out correctly.

My PIA is 2500
Wife's PIA is 950
Wife is 11 months older then I
HUSBAND: Normal planning horizon 82 years
WIFE: Long planning horizon 92 years

Sent PM
Look into the following: DW starts her benefits at her FRA. You begin your benefits 11 months later when you hit your FRA. At that time have DW take Spousal (50%) benefits. When that commences, suspend your own benefits (or not) until whatever age you desire.

After you hit FRA the spousal benefits do not increase by waiting until a later date.
__________________
Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered. That's my story and I am sticking to it.
packrat44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 12:33 PM   #18
Recycles dryer sheets
padlin00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by packrat44 View Post
Look into the following: DW starts her benefits at her FRA. You begin your benefits 11 months later when you hit your FRA. At that time have DW take Spousal (50%) benefits. When that commences, suspend your own benefits (or not) until whatever age you desire.

After you hit FRA the spousal benefits do not increase by waiting until a later date.
It's not big bucks, but doing it the way I marked down pays out about an extra $1800 a year between 66 and 70 then me doing file and suspend and wife doing spousal at my FRA, $1401 (901+450) vs $1244 (2488/2) a month.
__________________
padlin00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 12:57 PM   #19
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Chicago suburbs
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by freebird5825 View Post
Hi again, Hi again. Well it is that time for me - turning 62 in August. Now EVERYBODY tells me "grab it at 62 - do the math - you will have to live to about 77-80 to make up the difference on what you are giving up not taking it early.

Uhh huh and good point. However I recently read an opinion for a CFP on this issue. "If you NEED the income then take it. However if you don't need it and are just going to let it sit in the bank consider this. For every year you don't take it at 62, Social Security grows at an annual rate of about 8%. It is kind of like investing your money at an 8% growth rate per annum. If you are just going to let it sit in a Savings Account, CD or Money Market earning the current .75 or 1 percent you are better off letting it sit growing at 8%. That is unless of courses you can find a better investment vehicle for it that can generate an annual return of 8 % or better. Plus remember the approx 8% growth SS generates is tax free growth. Thoughts Mr. B
Yep, and every year you wait you get 8% older and closer to death. It's like a deal with the devil. Give me your life now, and I'll give it back to you later with my payment.

Not for me. It's going to be 62 here, and will enjoy those active years.
__________________
Richard8655 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2013, 01:27 PM   #20
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard8655 View Post
Yep, and every year you wait you get 8% older and closer to death.
Wow! You must really be on a fast track to meet the reaper! According to the life actuarial tables of the SSA, expectancy at age 63 is down 3.8% from age 62; and the decrement from 69-70 is 4.56%.

So actuarially, you are indeed shifting some years from the future to the past, but not at the rate you proposed. But those who wait for SS do it in part because we are long horizon planners, and partly because a longer life with dwindling funds is a threat to our finances, while a rapid rendezvous with death is not.

Ha
__________________

__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
haha is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:19 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.