Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06-26-2020, 08:36 PM   #21
Moderator
rodi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 10,800
There is no "one" answer that is right for everyone.

Some people need the money sooner to maintain their quality of life. And with the idea that spending goes down as you get older - the answer will probably work well for them.

Other people have a lot of longevity in their, or their spouse's family... so delaying means more money.

The whole spouse thing: age difference between spouses, SS income between spouses, whether there's a spouse in the picture, etc... All are individual factors in the decision.

Lets not forget the tax torpedo of RMDs and big SS payments... That might factor into some folks decision.

Hubby started collecting at 62 because we had minor age children who would get a benefit as well.... That tilted the financial decision pretty significantly to claiming early.

I still have 3.5 years till I could claim at 62... I'm of the mindset that I'll make the decision based on financial/tax considerations/etc that exist at the time. If things stay static I'll delay for a bit while I continue to Roth convert.
__________________

__________________
Retired June 2014. No longer an enginerd - now I'm just a nerd.
micro pensions 7%, rental income 18%
rodi 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 06-27-2020, 12:40 AM   #22
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 721
Isn’t almost ANY financial (as well as many others, such as the car question) based on what question is asked and what that answer is? Am I missing something here?

The only real difference is what ever is most important to you at the time.

When to file for SS has been beaten to death because of what questions appear most important. Purely financial is based on an assumed age of expiration and whether that early income is more useful now vs later.

Anyone that uses the old “it’s more useful now than later” typically needs the money now and doesn’t see anybenefit in a higher income/preferred tax liability later.

It always boils down to a few reasons, and how important they are as well as the relative worth compared to your income.

Someone with $10M and $400k/yr income has no reason to delay. Any decision they make is practically moot.

Any single person with a healthy portfolio and a small amount of early SS, say $12k/yr, has little reason to delay, as the delayed amount differential isn’t going to make much difference in their lifestyle, or to anyone else if they make the wrong decision.

A married couple with a high percentage of their retirement income based on whether the high earner is alive, and a large early SS (say $30k/yr) has more reason to delay as that amount would be $48-50k @70. Throw in ACA & Roth conversion and “take it early so you can enjoy it now” is down right stupid.

Longevity insurance has already been mentioned as well as annuity income vs investment income.

So OF COURSE it depends on what questions are asked/more important to you.
__________________

Perryinva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2020, 04:38 AM   #23
Full time employment: Posting here.
atmsmshr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: An island off the coast of Florida. (Ok - if you really need to know it's Vero Beach)
Posts: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodi View Post
There is no "one" answer that is right for everyone.

Some people need the money sooner to maintain their quality of life. And with the idea that spending goes down as you get older - the answer will probably work well for them.

Other people have a lot of longevity in their, or their spouse's family... so delaying means more money.

The whole spouse thing: age difference between spouses, SS income between spouses, whether there's a spouse in the picture, etc... All are individual factors in the decision.

Lets not forget the tax torpedo of RMDs and big SS payments... That might factor into some folks decision.

Hubby started collecting at 62 because we had minor age children who would get a benefit as well.... That tilted the financial decision pretty significantly to claiming early.

I still have 3.5 years till I could claim at 62... I'm of the mindset that I'll make the decision based on financial/tax considerations/etc that exist at the time. If things stay static I'll delay for a bit while I continue to Roth convert.
+1

Add: Depends also on legacy goals, the age difference between spouses, wage income history, if SSDI is being collected, pension and asset base.
__________________
DW and I are 59/58. FIRE August 2019. Non-cola pension available but will remain untouched until mid sixties to grow, max SS for DH at FRA or 70. Mega retiree health available. IRA rollover from 401k Jan 2020 for NUA treatment. LTCG next few years. AA 33% stocks, 10% cash and 57% Intermediate Treasury fund. Rising equity glidepath.
atmsmshr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2020, 05:09 AM   #24
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perryinva View Post
It always boils down to a few reasons, and how important they are as well as the relative worth compared to your income.

Someone with $10M and $400k/yr income has no reason to delay. Any decision they make is practically moot.

Any single person with a healthy portfolio and a small amount of early SS, say $12k/yr, has little reason to delay, as the delayed amount differential isnít going to make much difference in their lifestyle, or to anyone else if they make the wrong decision. ....

So OF COURSE it depends on what questions are asked/more important to you.
Your point is very relevant to me. I have been running several different retirement calculators and have realized the difference between taking SS at FRA it 70 does not affect my overall spend or withdrawal rate over a 35-40 year span. I have come to the realization that decisions I made 20-30 years ago with regard to how much to save each year (mostly maximize tax deferred along with employer match as well as save beyond that if possible) as well as the decision to stay a Reservist until the particular grade/longevity walls hit will have more of an impact on my spending ability than SS and when I take it.

I am so very fortunate and yet as I look back, I wasn't necessarily making some of those decisions with the insight nor possibilities I realize I have now.

Any COLA adjusted pension or annuity takes pressure off portfolio performance for possible spending limits. For some, that annuity is their only means.

Back to your point, where timing becomes most important is in the middle of the algorithm; the outside edges (other income/large portfolio or no other income) timing has much less a weight in overall desired outcome of resources available to spend. In my case the range is lower than $10M/$400K, much lower, but not shabby either. That's also being single so largest tax hit as well.
deserat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2020, 05:47 AM   #25
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Dublin
Posts: 70
I plan to take it ASAP when I reach age 62. Because it is an actuarial coin flip and there is no guarantee on how long I will live and that old adage, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Add that we have planned and saved and delayed and prepared with 401K's and Rothís and should have plenty of nest egg to meet late life needs. Then the final hammer to the nail of taking it early would be this excellent article that I think someone posted on here that I will share again...

https://fersguide.com/wp-content/upl...w-or-Later.pdf

Taking it at 62 is such a no-brainer that anything else makes my head hurt. That is just me though.
Audie Murphy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2020, 06:37 AM   #26
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RunningBum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 9,386
You're right, that article was brought up here: https://www.early-retirement.org/for...ml#post2413567
and a few of us pointed out some major flaws with it in posts following that.
RunningBum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2020, 06:47 AM   #27
Full time employment: Posting here.
wmc1000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Fishers
Posts: 848
Yes, everyone's SS "flavor" is different! Isn't that what makes it great so we can choose based on our individual circumstances?

For us we claimed at FRA of 66. Why? Because it covered 100% of our expenses including our mortgage! Yes, we have a mortgage but the balance is so small, (less than $12K), and our monthly mortgage payment pays $1,000 per month towards the principal so in another year we have another $12,000 freed up from our SS payments for discretionary use without touching any of our retirement accounts.

If one of us passes early the remaining single SS payment would still cover 100% of essential expenses, so for our FRA "flavor" of SS we didn't need or want to wait any longer.

We feel blessed to be in this position and it is due to our living at or below our means which led to us being in this position now which we have tried to instill in our children.
wmc1000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2020, 05:57 PM   #28
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Dublin
Posts: 70
I kills me all the passion and controversy around this issue. We will have our house paid in full and plenty of nest egg to look forward to. The plan is to take SS at 62 and possibly work part time if necessary. The decision is different for everyone but for us it just makes sense to get all that we can ASAP. It will not take a lot of money to live month to month with no debt. In fact, I can see living high on the hog, so to speak.
Audie Murphy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2020, 06:21 PM   #29
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: 26,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dtail View Post
The actuarial SS tables haven't been updated in awhile and thus "actuarial neutral" is probably not quite correct and understates the benefits of delaying to a small extent.
+1... also, actuarial neutrality is based on uni-sex mortality... IOW there is no difference between the discounts/premia for claiming early/delaying for men vs women and we know that women typically live longer than men. All else being equal men would be better claiming earlier and women later due solely to this.

In addition, the actuarial neutrality is only for a single life.... for married people where one person had significantly higher earnings than the other, joint mortality is a significant factor. While I will likely live to be 85 and DW to 88 according to the SOA longevity calculator, one or the other of us will likely live to be 92. So it is likely that one or the other or us will collect my benefit for 27 years.

https://www.longevityillustrator.org/
Attached Images
File Type: png Capture.PNG (20.2 KB, 18 views)
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56...target 65/35/0 AA TBD
pb4uski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2020, 09:05 PM   #30
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 721
Exactly. And since income is fungible, if there is more than adequate resources to delay, and no reason to assume a shorter life, then why not delay? Of course, since I am already delaying and past 62, it is easier to say that. DW is 67.5 and filed at 62. Time flew by.
Perryinva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2020, 11:34 PM   #31
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Sunset's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Spending the Kids Inheritance and living in Chicago
Posts: 9,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audie Murphy View Post
I kills me all the passion and controversy around this issue. We will have our house paid in full and plenty of nest egg to look forward to. The plan is to take SS at 62 and possibly work part time if necessary. The decision is different for everyone but for us it just makes sense to get all that we can ASAP. It will not take a lot of money to live month to month with no debt. In fact, I can see living high on the hog, so to speak.
If you have plenty of nest egg, why would you work out of necessity

You do understand about survivor-ship and SS , how if the higher earner or only earner waits until age 70, then that high SS amount is paid until you are both dead.
__________________
Fortune favors the prepared mind. ... Louis Pasteur
Sunset is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2020, 05:04 AM   #32
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Dublin
Posts: 70
I only mean to supplement some early year income to prevent over use of nest $$. Retirement for me is not going to be like flipping a switch. It will more resemble the slow turning back of a rheostat. When we are completely not working any part time hours from early “retirement” SS and nest egg will become a two legged stool. One leg will be pretty fat. It does not cost that much to live.
Audie Murphy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2020, 08:23 AM   #33
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Chuckanut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West of the Mississippi
Posts: 10,690
Then there is always this analysis.

https://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f28/laurence-kotlikoff-maximize-my-ss-com-77660.html#post1604411


If you don't care about leaving an estate to your heirs (admittedly a very big IF for many of us), taking SS at 70 gives you more money to spend each year starting at 62.

Quote:
Here is a pretty simple calculation for those that wish to spend more money in retirement and do not care about leaving an estate. For those that have a Big enough Portfolio and can afford to wait until 70 to take SS, you'll have more to spend every year of retirement.
__________________
The worst decisions are usually made in times of anger and impatience.
Chuckanut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2020, 09:16 AM   #34
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: 26,131
I like this analysis and just copied it from Chuckanut's link.

Quote:
Forget trying to calculate how much 'You'll Get'...Focus on How much you get to spend.

Here is a pretty simple calculation for those that wish to spend more money in retirement and do not care about leaving an estate. For those that have a Big enough Portfolio and can afford to wait until 70 to take SS, you'll have more to spend every year of retirement.

Let's Say you retire this year at age 62 with the $1 Million Portfolio and decide to take a 4% SWR. You get Social Security of $19,476 per year at age 62 and delaying to age 70 would get you $34,092 per year. Let's assume no inflation for ease of calculations.

Scenario age 62. Your SWR is $40K per year and Social Security of $19,476 gets you a Spending total of $59,476 for each year of your retirement period.

Scenario age 70. You stash 8 years of $34,092 from your portfolio into a savings account for a total of $272,736. Your portfolio is now down to $727,264. Your 4% SWR is now $29,090 per year and you remove $34,092 from your savings account giving you a total of $63,182 to spend each year for the rest of your 30 year retirement period.

The Delay to age 70 gives you $3,706 more every year starting at age 62 with no more increased risk.

No need for any stupid 'break even analysis'.

If your WR is more conservative, such as a majority of the people here and myself, the results are even more compelling. At a 3% WR plus SS at age 62 scenario is a total of $49,476 and the age 70 scenario is $55,910. The delay of SS to age 70 now increases your annual spending by $6,434.
__________________
If something cannot endure laughter.... it cannot endure.
Patience is the art of concealing your impatience.
Slow and steady wins the race.

Retired Jan 2012 at age 56...target 65/35/0 AA TBD
pb4uski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2020, 03:35 PM   #35
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
RunningBum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 9,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckanut View Post
Then there is always this analysis.

https://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f28/laurence-kotlikoff-maximize-my-ss-com-77660.html#post1604411


If you don't care about leaving an estate to your heirs (admittedly a very big IF for many of us), taking SS at 70 gives you more money to spend each year starting at 62.
Yep. And one of the reasons I get sucked into the when to take SS threads is that there are always the people who say they want to take it at 62 when they are more active and want to spend it. It's tough for me to leave that alone.

And I think that even if you do care about leaving an estate, 70 isn't necessarily wrong. I didn't go back to that point an see what they said, but I think the breakeven point does come into play here. Once you reach breakeven you will leave more. And if you don't reach it, chances are you've still left a lot of your savings intact.
RunningBum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2020, 05:41 PM   #36
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Tampa
Posts: 6,226
For me with the ACA management and lump sum pension at 65, the decision is easy until 66.
Then one year at a time decision from there.
__________________
TGIM
Dtail is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2020, 06:06 AM   #37
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 721
It doesn’t take that much to live?? Okaaaay.

Funny, I made the same point about spending more from day one on the other thread. I suspect there are just as many that not only don’t care how much they leave to heirs, but many like me, That want to leave as little to heirs as reasonably possible. Funny, too, I hadn’t considered that a lower WR meant a higher differential, but I did consider the net gains after taxes taking advantage of Roth conversions and the tax preferred treatment of SS income. We have pensions that, along with SS at any level put us in the 22/25% bracket. It all adds up to more income now, by delaying filing.

As said about 1000 times, if you need SS at age 62 to live, then there is No mo discussion. There is no choice to file later, unless you keep working, and if you can live on your savings plus age 62 SS rather than work, then do it, if you hate your job. Just state that, and not “It’s obvious that everyone should file at 62” BS.
__________________

Perryinva 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
Name for This Architecture Style? TromboneAl Other topics 3 06-25-2018 05:05 PM
Started Social Social Security at age 62 but my break even date is well into my 80s Retired and Restless FIRE and Money 96 12-24-2016 12:49 PM
Favorite Architecture / Architects Htown Harry Other topics 20 11-12-2008 11:24 PM
Climate Change - choice between 13" and 16.5" seal level rise? ERD50 Other topics 22 05-07-2007 10:09 AM
Another commentary on Social Security "Reform" Hyperborea Other topics 11 01-29-2005 10:31 AM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:46 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
×