Deferring SS

[ShokWaveRider]

If the ACA goes away, as it has been speculated this year, we will be forced to take SS at 67 and 62 respectively to help pay for Healthcare for DW. Otherwise I will wait till 70 and DW will take hers at 65.

 

[eytonxav]

It is interesting to follow this thread on how so many have changed their thinking on this subject. Lol
At one time there was only one way to take SS and any other way almost like a crime.

I have a few friends who are pretty well off. They said I was crazy not to take SS at 62

 

[prototype]

Here are some older discussion threads on when to take SS. One has a poll.


https://www.early-retirement.org/fo...cial-security-benefits-at-age-62-a-90176.html


https://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f29/poll-when-will-did-you-draw-from-ssa-69230.html


I took mine at about 63 for health reasons.

 

[Sunset]

It is interesting to follow this thread on how so many have changed their thinking on this subject. Lol
At one time there was only one way to take SS and any other way almost like a crime.

I view it as a good thing, that dramatic events can bring to light the ability of us old geezers to re-evaluate the situation based on the new facts, rather than stick to dogma.

Same thing as a few years ago, I would have never considered and never did order my groceries to be picked by someone else.
Heck, I never even wanted DW doing it as I was that picky.
Now I'm happy to have total strangers picking my food and bagging it for me to pickup curbside.

 

[jimbee]

It is interesting to follow this thread on how so many have changed their thinking on this subject. Lol
At one time there was only one way to take SS and any other way almost like a crime.

Could be recency bias.

 

[walkinwood]

It is interesting to follow this thread on how so many have changed their thinking on this subject. Lol
At one time there was only one way to take SS and any other way almost like a crime.

If you read the posts before your comment, you'll see that most people are keeping to their plan. There's just one person who said that they have changed their mind. Some others are watching & waiting.

Our plan is to have both of us wait till 70, but most calculators are suggesting that the lower earner take SS early and let the other one wait till 70. Our benefits are pretty close in value.

 

[PatrickA5]

Funny this topic came up (again) as I was running SS calculators for the umpteenth time. They still say I should take at 64 and DW at 70, but the NPV difference if I take at 62 is extremely small. With DW likely to lose her job and neither of us having pensions, I'm seriously considering taking at 62 so we have at least some money coming in. I'd hate to take 100% of our spending money out of savings starting so early - especially in this environment. My, how our financial outlook has changed in a couple of months!

 

[RobbieB]

My plan of taking at FRA has not changed

 

[PatrickA5]

It is very hard to speculate on where SS is going. I read that because of the mounting debt, there was/is an "Eagle Plan" being circulated, it proposes buying off SS recipients with a lump sum (I read ~$10k) in exchange for something, perhaps lower distributions. Again all this is just speculation for now, but worrisome none the less.

Gee, we just printed a few trillion and gave it away. How many more trillions do we need to print to shore this thing up?

Just kidding...I think.

 

[Sunset]

Funny this topic came up (again) as I was running SS calculators for the umpteenth time. They still say I should take at 64 and DW at 70, but the NPV difference if I take at 62 is extremely small. With DW likely to lose her job and neither of us having pensions, I'm seriously considering taking at 62 so we have at least some money coming in. I'd hate to take 100% of our spending money out of savings starting so early - especially in this environment. My, how our financial outlook has changed in a couple of months!

What about if you check for the differences due to early death, I'm not sure but is there a difference if say your DW dies at age 69 (before collecting) , what are the numbers if you took at 62 instead of 64 ?

 

[travelover]

I don't know either.

 

[PatrickA5]

What about if you check for the differences due to early death, I'm not sure but is there a difference if say your DW dies at age 69 (before collecting) , what are the numbers if you took at 62 instead of 64 ?

If she died at 69, I assume I would be able to switch over to her higher survivor benefits. In that case, I would have been better off taking SS at 62 (instead of 64).

 

[RetiredAt55.5]

It is interesting to follow this thread on how so many have changed their thinking on this subject. Lol
At one time there was only one way to take SS and any other way almost like a crime.

There's 34,531 members. You're basing this off of 23 replies, some of which didn't even mention their plan?

 

[Chuckanut]

One last thing worth mentioning on when to take SS:

If you don't care about leaving an estate to your heirs ( A Big If for sure) you will have more money to spend for the rest of your life if you take SS at 70.

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.

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

 

[Chuckanut]

Who would have thought how nice it is to read about another ongoing, never ending debate on when to take SS, instead of you-know-what.

 

[Sunset]

If she died at 69, I assume I would be able to switch over to her higher survivor benefits. In that case, I would have been better off taking SS at 62 (instead of 64).

I was wondering do you get the same amount or is your survivor (maybe wrong word) amount reduced because you start at 62 instead of 64 ?

 

[CardsFan]

One last thing worth mentioning on when to take SS:

Who would have thought how nice it is to read about another ongoing, never ending debate on when to take SS, instead of you-know-what.

One LAST thing? Even you didn't have one last thing to say about when to take SS.

Just adding some humor. no offense meant.

 

[Dtail]

DGF already on SSDI.
Due to ACA income management and a lump sum pension at 65, the earliest I will take it is at 66.
Longevity is in my family as DM is 87 and DF is 90 and all their cousins and my grandparents lived past 80.
Will decide year by year when hopefully hitting 66.

 

[HI Bill]

Am I to assume that most on this forum are at or near the maximum benefit allowed under Social Security? 35 years of work history plus a salary for each working year at or above the threshold for SS taxes would be needed. I suspect some here would qualify (including those who appear to have won the game many times over), but how many who were truly early retirees?

Most early retirees (especially those who went to college) won't see 35 years of w#rking.

I'm at year 32 this year, at age 54. I didn't max out the SS contribution until half-way through my career...so if I FIRED today, I'd be at 87% of maximum benefits, if I wait until 70. Since I'm the higher earner, if my wife and I are still in decent health, and she will get spousal benefit, I'm planning to wait until 70 to start benefits....unless my investments tank and I'm running low on $, or SS takes a significant haircut.

 

[braumeister]

Bear in mind that I am no expert.

But you do have an uncanny ability to predict the stock market, even if it's inadvertent.

 

[statsman]

Not here.
In fact it's a bit low for me, spouse is also not near the max. But we both did work, just first bunch of years the earnings were not great.
And we did early retire so missed out on about 7 more years of earnings at our highest rates.

Nope, I only have 24 years worth, since I worked for the government (DoD) for 10 years. And a fair number of those 24 were below the tax threshold.

Not me.

I think many of us are here because we were good at LBYM and invested wisely over decades. I was always well under the SS deduction limit. Always. I retired 4 years before the my full retirement age with SS. I could have retired a few years earlier than that but I had to wait to find good medical insurance at a reasonable price. Once I found it, the decision was made.

Most early retirees (especially those who went to college) won't see 35 years of w#rking.

I'm at year 32 this year, at age 54. I didn't max out the SS contribution until half-way through my career...so if I FIRED today, I'd be at 87% of maximum benefits, if I wait until 70.

Looks like those posts by members who have exceedingly won the game stuck in my mind, and I just assumed many "early" retirees had similar income levels while working.

Seems like from the comments above many here would not even be close to the maximum benefit for a given SS age, although it does make a lot of sense.

I was curious about this because I wondered if that impacted a person's (or couple's) decision on when to take SS. Would someone who qualified for ~90% of the maximum benefit take it later or earlier than someone who qualified for less, say ~70%. As someone indicated earlier, this may be a question best answered by a poll (or separate thread). Or maybe the question of when to take SS, regardless of percent of maximum benefit, has been answered numerous times in previous threads.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[PatrickA5]

I was wondering do you get the same amount or is your survivor (maybe wrong word) amount reduced because you start at 62 instead of 64 ?

I'm not a SS expert, but since she and I are the same age, I think I will get her amount assuming we were both over full retirement age at the date of her death. I found this on the AARP website:

The survivor benefit is generally calculated on the benefit your late spouse was receiving from Social Security at the time of death (or was entitled to receive, based on age and earnings history, if he or she had not yet claimed benefits). The actual amount of your payment will differ according to your age and family circumstance:
As noted above, if you have reached full retirement age, you get 100 percent of the benefit your spouse was (or would have been) collecting.
If you claim survivor benefits between age 60 (50 if disabled) and your full retirement age, you will receive between 71.5 percent and 99 percent of the deceased’s benefit. (The percentage gets higher the older you are when you claim.)

 

[RetireBy90]

I stay curious about all financial factors, and still feel it is better to maximize the SS number for my spouse by waiting until 70.

This has been my plan and still is for same reason. She took her SS at FRA

 

[Ronstar]

Given the current state of affairs, I am thinking of taking ss earlier than I originally intended. I originally intended to take ss at FRA, which is Oct 2021. I'm thinking of taking it now, or wait until Jan 2021 to get one more good roth conversion. DW is taking at fra this september.

So I won't be taking it a lot earlier than I originally intended since I'm so close to fra. But I do think that a ss haircut 10 years from now would make it more sensible to take ss earlier that originally thought.

 

[hulurt1]

I'm 67..3 months ago I moved all my vanguard accounts to MM. I have 1.3m. That's a big no. I live on 3000 a month and save 1/2 of that. I have paid cash or paid off everything in very short time I have not had a house payment for 30 years. My SS is going up by about 8%. If I take out 52000 a year I will live and not run out of money until 92. SS is at 70. If I die so what I have not work for 12 years and my Ira is up 500000. Look at everything. So my plan is 50/50 cash. Than SS at 70. No debt and look at SS as a another stream of money. Use some of you Ira up.