Poll: When Did You/Are You Planning to Start Soc Sec?

[Milkman]

DW is 2 years older than me. She filed at FRA. When I turned 66 I filed a "restricted application for a spousal benefit" which gave me a monthly amount equal to half of her Soc. Sec. benefit. Meanwhile I still built up my benefits for another 4 years until I reached 70. Now that I have reached 70, I am getting my maximum benefit while she filed for a spousal benefit on me. She now gets roughly $400 a month more than she was receiving for her own FRA benefit. It is my understanding that this program is phasing out for people born after 1-1-1954.

 

[Stormy Kromer]

I posted 62 (actually 62 and 5 months). Here's why. I am welcome to any suggestions or comments.

DW and I are FIRED. Me 55, DW 60. I was the higher earner and she'll be filing on my earnings.

She will file at FRA, 67 and collect 50% of my FRA. In order to do this, I have to file. I will be 62.5.

This is kind of a reverse situation for most couples.

I'm not worried about outliving the break even point. Using SS income will allow us to leave that equal amount of funds invested in our taxable accounts at VG. Invested for the long term it should grow nicely and be there when we hit the break even point.

 

[pjigar]

I plan to take SS at 62 which "Maximizes" our family lifetime benefits. We have an intellectually disabled son who qualifies for SS benefits based on my lifetime income so it makes sense for us to start SS as soon as I am eligible. Our case shows that one needs to look at individual factors rather than blindly relying on conventional wisdom. I planned to take SS at 70 for the longest time until one day I stumbled on OpenSocialSecurity.com and plugged in our numbers.

 

[Oakster]

I'll have to provide at least a small explanation because there was a PLAN-A which then became PLAN-B. Was going to go past 62 till the checks became a little fatter but no way wait til 70. Then had a heart attack at age 62+10 months. At 62 and 11 months filed for SS because that that longevity / break-even math went out out the widow.

I think that is the big picture for me. Get the most out of the system that I can. I am overweight, but otherwise my family lives fairly long lives. At this time I plan to not need SS, but will take it as early as possible to keep my investments growing. I may not max out SS in the end, but I will increase my odds at getting more checks.

I may rethink it when the time gets close because my wife is 5 years younger than me. She is very healthy. Unfortunately, both of her parents passed in their mid 60's from cancer. I dont know if I should plan for the long term for her, or get what we can get, as quickly as we can and leave our investments growing. Our current plan, which we are exceeding the plan numbers, will leave us not needed SS.

 

[Oakster]

I took mine early simply because I find it easier to rationalize spending 'their' money rather than mine. Mine continues to grow and invested much more aggressively because of SS income and not needing the IRA funds. (I have a pension as well)
I also figure I'm younger and would enjoy the dollars more at this time than sometime well after my 70's. For example; bought a rather large pontoon boat that my sons and their families (grand kids) enjoy a lot. Upgrades to the house with a large deck described in 'blow that dough' thread. Next will be my barn / shop. Break-even point based on my calcs is age 78. When I'm then collecting less than I would have otherwise, I'll be sitting in my rocker on the front porch reminiscing on the experiences I enjoyed with taking those dollars sooner rather than later.

I love it!

 

[potto0213]

Started few months before 70. More beneficial to have it going in Dec and get the COLA increase for following year. Different for everyone depending on birthday.

You will get the COLA increase either way. You do not have to be collecting in order for the COLA to be added to your PIA.

 

[corn18]

I ran some what if scenarios WRT SS start age. It was interesting that if I start it @ 62, vs. 70, I don't need to do any tIRA conversions to stay in the 12% tax bracket. The lower SS amount @ 72 allows enough headroom to keep RMD's in the 12% bracket. If I wait until 70 to take SS, the higher income reduces the headroom to 0 for 12% RMDs. Fascinating.

I can also confirm that taking SS early during a 1966-2001 retirement (worst period in history for SORR) really mitigates the lengthy market downturn.

We've got 7 years to decide, but 62 is looking good, too.

 

[RunningBum]

I ran some what if scenarios WRT SS start age. It was interesting that if I start it @ 62, vs. 70, I don't need to do any tIRA conversions to stay in the 12% tax bracket. The lower SS amount @ 72 allows enough headroom to keep RMD's in the 12% bracket. If I wait until 70 to take SS, the higher income reduces the headroom to 0 for 12% RMDs. Fascinating.

Would delaying until 70 leave you headroom to fully convert your IRA by age 70 within the 12% tax bracket?

I can also confirm that taking SS early during a 1966-2001 retirement (worst period in history for SORR) really mitigates the lengthy market downturn.

There might be something to that, though I think this goes somewhat hand in hand with the notion of taking SS if the market tanks. I think reacting to the market is better than predicting it, in terms of starting SS.

While the market is high, I don't see a good case for starting SS just in case it tanks, because while it's high you would rather be taking more out of your investments for spending. Meanwhile, defer your SS benefit so that it will be higher later.

But if the market does tank, that's when you'd rather not be selling investments for living expenses, so it would be good to start SS at that point.

So I'll stick with being reactive to a down market to start SS, rather than starting SS because of a possible market downturn.

 

[Cobra9777]

I have the higher PIA, so I'll probably wait until 70 to maximize that benefit for DW after I'm gone... unless my health situation changes. Longevity seems to be considerably longer in her family than mine.

As for DW, we'll probably start around 67-68... maybe earlier if there's a SHTF scenario in the markets, or again if there's a change in her health situation. But by 67-68, we should be just about done with Roth conversions. Plus the taxable brokerage account should be nearly exhausted by then, largely due to tax on conversions.

In principle, I'm not opposed to the "file at 62 and invest" school. But given where the market is currently, I don't think that's a huge potential. So I'm quite happy to take the 8% and continue with aggressive conversions while the rates are so attractive.

 

[Dtail]

If you are a savy disciplined intelligent investor/money manager/professional,you know that you can obtain a far greater return by taking present day/value dollars,and investing them in a high yielding vehicle.A simple vanguard mutual fund/etf,(the best in class and no/low fees/expenses),historically yields at a minimum in the 10% range excluding dividends and reinvestments.That alone,militates against "waiting" for several years for the government to "give" you an extra 4% to 8% on your initial "early" social security payout.Also,if you are in a higher income/net worth level,the taxes on any benefit will no doubt increase substantially in the future and/or result in decrease benefits and means testing.I am a well to do quite accomplished attorney,ceo and member of the accredited investor class,and there is absolutely no logical and/or rational rationale to wait one extra day to collect social security benefits for the reasons aforementioned,leave alone the program solvency and life expectancy risks to boot.Godspeed and Namaste,Stuart Rothenberg Esq.

Very confident first post after 10 years.

 

[Calico]

Very confident first post after 10 years.

Indeed.

 

[golfnut]

Taking at fra which is 66 yrs and 2 months. Maybe a dumb question, my bday is is 1st week of august. Should I be looking to get my first full fra check the 2nd week of October?

 

[corn18]

Would delaying until 70 leave you headroom to fully convert your IRA by age 70 within the 12% tax bracket?

Yes. The only advantage is paying less tax from 55-62, which reduces SORR. And it leaves lots of room for 0% LTCG so I can tax gain harvest my large taxable account.

There might be something to that, though I think this goes somewhat hand in hand with the notion of taking SS if the market tanks. I think reacting to the market is better than predicting it, in terms of starting SS.

While the market is high, I don't see a good case for starting SS just in case it tanks, because while it's high you would rather be taking more out of your investments for spending. Meanwhile, defer your SS benefit so that it will be higher later.

But if the market does tank, that's when you'd rather not be selling investments for living expenses, so it would be good to start SS at that point.

So I'll stick with being reactive to a down market to start SS, rather than starting SS because of a possible market downturn.

Yup. I will maximize 0% LTCG tax gain harvesting from 55-60 and do some Roth conversions. Then take a look at how things are going @ age 60 and make a new plan. If the bull continues for those 5 years, I'll delay SS. If the market has crashed or is crashing, I'll probably start SS @ 62.

 

[Gumby]

Taking at fra which is 66 yrs and 2 months. Maybe a dumb question, my bday is is 1st week of august. Should I be looking to get my first full fra check the 2nd week of October?

Yes. Your first month of eligibility is September and they pay in arrears. So you'll get your first check in October.

 

[Leo1277]

Definitely age 70. The 8% return is too much for me to give up, and my mother's family lives a long time. Dad's side, not so much, but they were all smokers.

It's been mentioned many times in SS threads, but the return is not 8%, because if you choose to wait and accrue the 8% you are not drawing payments, while you do if you take it now. In fact, in inflation adjusted dollars, if you die at the "standard" age computed by the actuaries (around 81), then the gain is exactly zero, or the rate of inflation if you want to compare to other investments (because SS is COLA'd at whatever inflation index they use). So it's a matter of guessing your longevity, of thinking whether you have better investment options, of marriage status, whether it can serve as a hedge for other investments, taxation at time of RMD, and related to it, aggressive Roth conversions before SS so SS won't be taxed as much (the decisive factor for me to wait), and a whole lot of other factors. There is no simple universal answer, the more you think and read the more you discover, and it's best to run one of the various good calculators.

 

[Cayman]

Early 50s, we're planning to wait 'til our 70s to draw SS.
We're below 2% WR and feel no need to spend, are very happy as is... but as others here point out, our perspective may change over time. Grateful to be in this position.

 

[Amethyst]

Never! I am short about eight quarters. I paid into a CSRS pension during most of my career.

 

[Digger1000]

I'm flabbergasted at that national poll.

I'm just a poor blue collar guy who never made much of a salary. I retired at age 51 four years ago. I will be taking SS at 70. I was also flabbergasted last year when I called into SS and found out how much my SS will be with making $0 in salary going forward. My SS will be way higher than I could have ever imagined.

Now if I can get the Govt to stop sending me these asinine stimulus checks.

 

[Dtail]

I'm flabbergasted at that national poll.

I'm just a poor blue collar guy who never made much of a salary. I retired at age 51 four years ago. I will be taking SS at 70. I was also flabbergasted last year when I called into SS and found out how much my SS will be with making $0 in salary going forward. My SS will be way higher than I could have ever imagined.

Now if I can get the Govt to stop sending me these asinine stimulus checks.

Just send the stimulus checks back.

 

[golfnut]

Yes. Your first month of eligibility is September and they pay in arrears. So you'll get your first check in October.

Thanks, appreciate it.

 

[ceciledian]

Planning on taking the calculator advice: 63 for me and 70 for DH. That also coincides with losing ACA tax credit when DH goes on Medicare.

 

[Dtail]

Yes. Your first month of eligibility is September and they pay in arrears. So you'll get your first check in October.

So does that mean if one dies in August, they still get a check for Sept and/or Oct?

 

[Gumby]

No. Social security does not pay partial months, so you don't actually get a benefit until the end of the first full month you are eligible. Thus, in the scenario we have been discussing, if you turn 62 in early August and then die before the end of the month, you will never start benefits. You also don't get paid social security for the month in which you die. So if you died in September, you won't get benefits. Your survivor is required to report your death to the SSA and return any money received for the month of your death or thereafter.

But let's assume everything goes well. You turn 62 in August. You will not receive any benefit for August.* You will start accruing benefits on September 1 and you will get a check the second Wednesday in October. That check is the payment of your September benefit. Your benefit for October will be paid the second Wednesday of November, and so on. (i.e. - payment in arrears)

* Except if you were born on the 1st or 2nd, then you get credit for a full month.



Here's a site that goes into greater detail -- https://www.simplywise.com/blog/when-do-social-security-benefits-begin/

 

[Dtail]

No. Social security does not pay partial months, so you don't actually get a benefit until the end of the first full month you are eligible. Thus, in the scenario we have been discussing, if you turn 62 in early August and then die before the end of the month, you will never start benefits. You also don't get paid social security for the month in which you die. So if you died in September, you won't get benefits. Your survivor is required to report your death to the SSA and return any money received for the month of your death or thereafter.

But let's assume everything goes well. You turn 62 in August. You will not receive any benefit for August.* You will start accruing benefits on September 1 and you will get a check the second Wednesday in October. That check is the payment of your September benefit. Your benefit for October will be paid the second Wednesday of November, and so on. (i.e. - payment in arrears)

* Except if you were born on the 1st or 2nd, then you get credit for a full month.



Here's a site that goes into greater detail -- https://www.simplywise.com/blog/when-do-social-security-benefits-begin/

So the govt makes out a little bit on each person.

 

[Gumby]

So the govt makes out a little bit on each person.

Not really. The law is that you get paid a benefit for every full month that you are eligible. They also only pay in whole dollars, and they round down from $0.99 to the lower dollar. You may think it should be different, but that's the law.