Join Early Retirement Today
View Poll Results: When did/will you draw from SSA?
62 100 37.88%
63 11 4.17%
64 4 1.52%
65 14 5.30%
66 43 16.29%
67 19 7.20%
68 1 0.38%
69 0 0%
70+ 72 27.27%
Voters: 264. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-14-2013, 09:03 PM   #101
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Austin
Posts: 224
70+ is what I am planning. SS covers around 20% of the budget, so don't see any significance either way.
__________________

__________________
HillCountry 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 12-14-2013, 11:07 PM   #102
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by HillCountry View Post
70+ is what I am planning.
You know that it maxes out at 70, so there is no advantage to waiting beyond then. Thus 70 is better than 70+.

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
Old 12-14-2013, 11:17 PM   #103
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Austin
Posts: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by haha View Post
You know that it maxes out at 70, so there is no advantage to waiting beyond then. Thus 70 is better than 70+.

Ha
It is 22 years away, so it may quite possible be 70+.
__________________
HillCountry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2013, 05:29 PM   #104
Confused about dryer sheets
Pastorm1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 5
Suggest reading this post.

http://www.nysscpa.org/cpajournal/20...ntials/p42.HTM

Taking mine at 62.
__________________
Pastorm1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2013, 07:44 AM   #105
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by daylatedollarshort View Post
Our current plan has us taking it at 62. I don't want to use up our own assets from 62 - 70. ....

However, if we have to pay extra in taxes by going for 62, we might delay. Our plan works at any age from 62 on, so we don't really need to decide until the time comes.
Taxes are part of the reason I am delaying until 70. Once I turn 70 my pension, RMDs and SS will push us into the 25% tax bracket unless I do Roth conversions as much as possible between now (58) and 70 so I'll save a lot in income taxes by waiting.

I was planning on 70 anyway as longevity insurance, but our tax situation sealed the deal.

If the investment performance is poor I can always chose to take it earlier if the balance of my nestegg gets uncomfortably low as the then lower tax deferred balances would make RMDs less of an issue.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2013, 08:13 AM   #106
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
gauss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,712
We plan to wait until age 70. It is the world's cheapest inflation adjusted annuity.

Although "average" life span may be 83 or so, we plan to live much longer than that. Good insurance, high sociol-economic status, high level of education, low stress (now that ER is here) etc. Probably not unlike many others here on the forum.

-gauss
__________________
gauss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2013, 11:42 AM   #107
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
pb4uski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vermont & Sarasota, FL
Posts: 16,490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pastorm1 View Post
Suggest reading this post.

Retirement at 62: Is Receiving Social Security Early Worth It?

Taking mine at 62.
It is unclear if the author took RMDs into account in his analysis - there is no mention of them.

Second, it also looks like he didn't consider joint mortality for couples - analysis focused on singles.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.
pb4uski is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2013, 07:57 PM   #108
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Colorado Mountains
Posts: 2,147
I voted for 70+. That's when I will start SS on my account, but I am currently collecting SS on my wife's account. Started when I retired this summer at 63. The option to collect on my wife's account made the decision to wait for my my account until 70 real easy.
__________________
Hermit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2013, 09:51 PM   #109
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 19,449
I have not voted and will not because I do not know. We also have two SS's which do not have to be drawn at the same time. I am not even 62 so have a few years left to think about this.

I think I am going to delay my own SS till 70 as an insurance for my wife who will most likely outlive me. And we may take her lower SS before that, the exact time to be determined.
__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky
NW-Bound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2013, 10:33 PM   #110
Recycles dryer sheets
beowulf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermit View Post
I voted for 70+. That's when I will start SS on my account, but I am currently collecting SS on my wife's account. Started when I retired this summer at 63. The option to collect on my wife's account made the decision to wait for my my account until 70 real easy.
Hermit-

If I understand the rules correctly, taking the spousal benefit before 66 permanently reduces your SS ultimate benefit by the percentage it's being reduced now. These are some explanations: Understanding "Free Spousal" Benefits | Social Security Choices and

http://www.investmentnews.com/articl...OG05/130909990

Since you were 63 when you took the spousal benefit, the 50% of your wife's payment you would have gotten is reduced by 18% (6% a year) - making your spousal benefit 32% of her benefit now. Worse, when you take your own SS at 70, whatever you get then will be reduced by 18%. Of course, maybe you will have taken in enough during the next 7 years to offset the 18% reduction at 70. Since your wife is still working, did she file and suspend?

BTW, you do have a year from when you started to reverse your action by simply paying back all the money to SS.
__________________
Mission accomplished - not necessarily ER, but certainly R.
beowulf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2013, 02:59 PM   #111
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Colorado Mountains
Posts: 2,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by beowulf View Post
Hermit-

If I understand the rules correctly, taking the spousal benefit before 66 permanently reduces your SS ultimate benefit by the percentage it's being reduced now. These are some explanations: Understanding "Free Spousal" Benefits | Social Security Choices and

http://www.investmentnews.com/articl...OG05/130909990

Since you were 63 when you took the spousal benefit, the 50% of your wife's payment you would have gotten is reduced by 18% (6% a year) - making your spousal benefit 32% of her benefit now. Worse, when you take your own SS at 70, whatever you get then will be reduced by 18%. Of course, maybe you will have taken in enough during the next 7 years to offset the 18% reduction at 70. Since your wife is still working, did she file and suspend?

BTW, you do have a year from when you started to reverse your action by simply paying back all the money to SS.
Sorry beowulf, I didn't add that my wife died 4 years ago. Rules for a surviving spouse are quite a bit different. By the way, I would have preferred to keep the DW around and forgone the extra SS but it didn't work out that way.
__________________
Hermit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2013, 03:18 PM   #112
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 19,449
Sorry about your loss. And if your DW were still around, you would have both SS's, and that would be even better financially as an additional person does not increase the cost of living 2X.

And regarding spousal benefits, we have a relative who got upset when finding out that when her husband died, she only got a step up to his higher SS while forgoing her own. She thought that SS would be like IRA or 401k, which would get passed on the heir.
__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky
NW-Bound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2013, 03:43 PM   #113
Recycles dryer sheets
beowulf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 466
I am so sorry for your loss, Hermit. I had no idea. You are 100% correct. Survivor rules are very different.
__________________
Mission accomplished - not necessarily ER, but certainly R.
beowulf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2013, 03:51 PM   #114
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Colorado Mountains
Posts: 2,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by beowulf View Post
I am so sorry for your loss, Hermit. I had no idea. You are 100% correct. Survivor rules are very different.
Hi beowulf,

I didn't mean to make you feel bad. I usually refer to my (deceased) DW to avoid confusion. Didn't this time. Might have been the time of year.

Hermit
__________________
Hermit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2013, 04:38 PM   #115
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 F4mandolin View Post
I guess I don't understand this one. My UK wife is eligible for the 50% spousal SS and she didn't put anything into the system either. Is there something with this GPO provision that just forces this not to happen?
That is the controversy of the GPO........

The GPO offsets your spousal benefit by 67% of any state/municipal pension you collect if your earned that pension in lieu of SS (did not contribute to SS while you were earning that pension). So, a stay at home spouse who never worked and never contributed to SS is eligible for 50% of the spouse's SS. A working spouse, say a public safety employee, who earned a pension from the state, is not eligible for any spousal SS if 67% of his/her pension is greater than 50% of his/her spouse's SS.

For example, if my SS was 20k, normally DW would get 50% or 10k. But 67% of her state pension is greater than 10k, so she gets nothing. If she had not worked at all, she would get the 10K.

Since my desire is to provide financial protection for DW should I predecease her, I started SS at 62. I'm investing the monthly payments and that accumulation would be available for her. The risk of waiting until 70 for me is that if I die before 70, neither of us would ever collect any of my SS and her situation would be less favorable. Otherwise, I would have delayed SS until 70.
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2013, 05:07 PM   #116
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 NW-Bound View Post
an additional person does not increase the cost of living 2X..
Maybe not at your house!
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2013, 01:37 AM   #117
Dryer sheet aficionado
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: marys ille
Posts: 40
63
__________________

__________________
trouthog 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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
% of Lifetime Earnings Saved based on SSA Medicare Earnings REattempt FIRE and Money 17 08-01-2013 07:51 PM
Pain during routine blood draw MichaelB Health and Early Retirement 8 06-05-2013 06:50 PM
SSA doesn't know if payments will be made tuckeverlasting FIRE Related Public Policy 9 07-24-2011 01:22 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:10 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.