Poll:When will/did you draw from SSA

[NW-Bound]

Though I do not expect to live beyond the average life expectancy, I probably will not claim it at 62 as I want to be sure my wife will be OK with the surviving spouse benefit (my SS will be higher than hers).

In any event, I still have 5 years to figure this all out, and the laws might change, so have not bothered to figure this all out yet.

[robnplunder]

Wow, thanks for the replies. I posted this to help decide what I should do and hope others can also benefit.

I could not find the acronyms for the following (even after checking the FAQ acronym thread):

WEP - not related to DSL security
Cola - not a soda
FRA - not a country designation
RMD - not a weapon of mass destruction
LTC - is it Long Term Care?

Can you enlighten this newbie on what they stand for? Thanks in advance.

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robnplunder Wow, thanks for the replies. I posted this to help decide what I should do and hope others can also benefit. I could not find the acronyms for the following (even after checking the FAQ acronym thread): WEP - not related to DSL security Cola - not a soda FRA - not a country designation RMD - not a weapon of mass destruction LTC - is it Long Term Care?

-
WEP - Windfall Elimination Provision
COLA - Cost of Living Allowance
FRA - Full Retirement Age
RMD - - Required Minimum Distribution
LTC - Long Term Care

As for me, I will probably wait until 70 before making a claim on my own SS, simply because I am already spending as much as I feel comfortable spending. If I wait like that, I will have more steady, predictable income in my old age and won't really need to worry too much about the market as I approach my final years on earth. I will probably be able to get half of my ex's SS starting next year at 66, to age 70 to bridge that gap.

[robnplunder]

As for me, I am leaning toward 70 given our longevity, and that we will have enough money to draw on (from 401k, investments, cash, ...). Of course, a lot can change between now and then so I reserved the right to change my mind numerous times until then ;-).

[Options]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Midpack We're also planning on 70 due to high longevity in both our families. If things go south and we need to take it earlier, so be it. However, it may increase our lifetime income (lower taxes) to take it earlier to avoid a stepwise increase at 70 due to RMD and max SS, I have 11-13 years to figure that out (hopefully by year end to begin Roth conversions ASAP) - we'll see...

+1
Regarding means testing SS: SS is already means tested. My bet is on SS 100% taxed and chained CPI, and possibly no cap on SS income tax. Much easier for politicians to implement with less blowback.

[Buck2520]

Quote:

Originally Posted by F4mandolin I am leaning towards 62-64 at this time (56). My wife is eligible for the spousal amount (50% of mine at 66.5). So....the longer I wait the more she will get as well. I don't know how to figure out the difference (of how much she gets) year to year so I will have to sit down and see if I can come up with the numbers at some point.

If she waits for FRA, then she gets half of your amount at FRA. Does not matter when you take your SS as long as you have filed and she is FRA. If you continue to work the only way it affects her spousal amount is if your current wages increases the 35 year average total they use to figure your FRA amount. If she files for benefits before she reaches FRA, it will affect her amount.

from Soc Sec web site

A spouse can choose to retire as early as age 62, but doing so may result in a benefit as little as 32.5 percent of the worker's primary insurance amount. A spousal benefit is reduced 25/36 of one percent for each month before normal retirement age, up to 36 months. If the number of months exceeds 36, then the benefit is further reduced 5/12 of one percent per month.

For a spouse who is not entitled to benefits on his or her own earnings record, this reduction factor is applied to the base spousal benefit, which is 50 percent of the worker's primary insurance amount. For example, if the worker's primary insurance amount is $1,600 and the worker's spouse chooses to begin receiving benefits 36 months before his or her normal retirement age, we first take 50 percent of $1,600 to get an $800 base spousal benefit. Then we compute the reduction factor, which is 36 times 25/36 of one percent, or 25 percent. Applying a 25 percent reduction to the $800 amount gives a spousal benefit of $600. Thus, in this case, the final spousal benefit is 37.5 percent of the primary insurance amount.

[Tom52]

Not retired but expect to take SS at 66. If I can RE I have a CD ladder that we support DW & me till age 66 without touching IRA, 401K. There could be the ability to control income/maximize ACA subsidies and do some Roth conversions during the 4 years until I take SS at 66.

[MikeTN]

I started at 66. Would have liked to wait longer because at current low interest rates it seems like a good investment. However, my wife claims the spousal benefit and has health issues. Also, I made this decision in early 2009 when the market fell so much I did not want to have to sell any equities.

[imoldernu]

Began taking SS in 1998 at age 62, after being retired for 9 years.
... for tax purposes, and because we were doing better @ 7% in CD's.

Probably sounds odd to younger retirees, but back when we retired, we were collecting more than 12% on 1yr. CD's... of course, for a while, mortgage rates were around 14% at the same time. A very different era, but may help explain why many older retirees (80's) are also risk averse.

[Lcountz]

I am 57 YO single female, no kids.

Have one sibling (sister) , no kids.

Mom is alive and very well at 92.

Her brother-(my uncle) alive and well at 88. His wife is 85. They still fly all over the US and Europe. and maintain two homes in Michigan and NYC- not stay at home seniors!!!!!

Mom's two cousins on her mother's side died at 88 and 90.

Mom's mom died at 85.

Dad died at 70, but from lung cancer after lifetime of smoking. I don't smoke.


I'm not concerned with leaving a legacy for anyone, have a very nice nest egg I can more than live off til 70, and a pension that covers all my expenses with a LOT left over. Been retired almost a year and still have not tapped my 401K.

I will get an inheritance, but am not counting on it. If it comes, I will be grateful.

I plan to wait for SS til 70, in part to avoid ridiculous RMD's and taxes.

Of course, if things change, so will I!!!!!!

[Rustward]

When we "plan" (i.e. FireCalc, RIP, ORP, etc.) we use age 66 (my FRA and DW's FRA+1), but if things continue as they have been for the past several years, we will wait until we each turn 70. It's a little scary thinking about the increase in income from SS and RMD's, but it is not the worst thing that could happen.

[rescueme]

I reach FRA in January and will file/suspend at that time. In May, my wife reaches FRA and will claim a 50% spousal claim against me (restricted claim).

Each of us will file against our own records in four years, at age 70.

While I have run the scenarios over the years using various forecast programs which showed this was the best option for us, it was also confirmed as the best way to maximize future SS benefits by running software made available on Monday (Veteran's Day) through the sponsorship of Kiplinger's: Kiplinger - Interstitial and Socal Security Solutions.

The projected break even point for our plan is age 78 (for those who are wondering). Then again, break even points are not that important to us. Our plan is to leave the largest possible estate (value) for our disabled son, along with ensuring we reduce our 70.5 RMD's to the extent we can before we reach that point in our lives.

And if we (either/or) don't live that long? So what; money was made for the living, not the dead. If we on this forum didn't think we would have a decent number of years in retirement I'm sure that we would have not saved/invested and planned as we did (or are) in preparation for the future.

BTW, if I was single I would probably take it at 62. There's no advantage to waiting for a single person. Bring a spouse (and even young childern) into the mix opens up a lot of possibilities that must be explored in order to make the correct decision that meets with your - and their needs.

[48Fire]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robnplunder ... and why?

I am only 53, but plan on taking it at 62. I have always been in favor of a quick nickel rather than a slow dime. If it helps supplement some additional traveling or a new vehicle, then that will be icing on the cake. Someone would have a hard time convincing me that the break-even point of 90 years old (?) is worth waiting for, if I make that at all.

[Khan]

62.
Because my pension decreased as of 62nd birthday.
I also don't think I'm going to make it to 80.

[misanman]

DW and I are the same age. She started at 62. I tagged along with a spousal benefit at 66. Will switch to my full benefit at 70. Figure the monthly increase in SS amount is equivalent to $4,000 in invested capital.

[Tandemlovers]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buck2520 If she waits for FRA, then she gets half of your amount at FRA. Does not matter when you take your SS as long as you have filed and she is FRA. If you continue to work the only way it affects her spousal amount is if your current wages increases the 35 year average total they use to figure your FRA amount. If she files for benefits before she reaches FRA, it will affect her amount. from Soc Sec web site A spouse can choose to retire as early as age 62, but doing so may result in a benefit as little as 32.5 percent of the worker's primary insurance amount. A spousal benefit is reduced 25/36 of one percent for each month before normal retirement age, up to 36 months. If the number of months exceeds 36, then the benefit is further reduced 5/12 of one percent per month. For a spouse who is not entitled to benefits on his or her own earnings record, this reduction factor is applied to the base spousal benefit, which is 50 percent of the worker's primary insurance amount. For example, if the worker's primary insurance amount is $1,600 and the worker's spouse chooses to begin receiving benefits 36 months before his or her normal retirement age, we first take 50 percent of $1,600 to get an $800 base spousal benefit. Then we compute the reduction factor, which is 36 times 25/36 of one percent, or 25 percent. Applying a 25 percent reduction to the $800 amount gives a spousal benefit of $600. Thus, in this case, the final spousal benefit is 37.5 percent of the primary insurance amount.

Thank you for posting this.

My spouse is nine years older than I am, and is planning to collect SS at his full retirement
age of 66, about five years from now. I will be collecting SS on his record.

I have not found an online calculator that is useful in calculating a break even point, presumably
because of the difference in our ages. The T Rowe Price calculator had an error message that
said they were working on including scenarios like ours.

Your quote from The SS website gives me a much better idea of what we can expect.

Thanks again!

[LinCella]

Mine won't be large as I worked for a city government for most of my work years that provides a pension and therefore did not pay into SS. So I figure at 62, get the money and have a nice lunch every now and then. It won't be for another 8 years so I'll have to watch my pennies as far as eating at restaurants goes for now.

[LinCella]

48Fire - ditto!

[Al in Ohio]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jager I'm 60 and plan on retiring next year when I am 61. I would like to take SS at 66 (FRA), or even later. But I'll probably take it starting at 62. I expect SS to be means-tested somewhere down the road. And I expect anyone with sufficient assets to contemplate ER - including most of the people on this board - to be adversely affected.

I seriously doubt any means testing would occur without risk of another American Revolution. Its much more likely to be non cola in the future, but closer to 2031 when it turns upside down.

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Al in Ohio I seriously doubt any means testing would occur without risk of another American Revolution. Its much more likely to be non cola in the future, but closer to 2031 when it turns upside down.

Well off older Americans are not going to revolt. There has never been a revolution of old folks in the streets. And America has never had and IMO will never have an Army or other right wing coup.

Ha