Poll: Taking SS - when?

[Sue J]

Accidental or anybody,

Could you please educate me? I do not familiar with WEP and GPO in the above post...

WEP is Windfall Elimination Provision which reduces an individual's SS benefit if they receive a government pension.

GPO is Government Provision Offset which affects an individual who receives a government pension. This offset applies to their benefit as a spouse. So a government pension recipient can claim a spousal benefit on their spouses SS, but it is reduced by 2/3 of their own government pension.

There is a limit to the WEP depending on your own years of paying into SS, you can find a chart for that on SSA.gov. Last time I looked the GPO is 2/3 of your pension.

DH has a pension from the state pension system from working in county social services. If he had completed 40 quarters of SS his benefit would be reduced by WEP. I will have a SS benefit but if he tried to claim as my spouse the GPO would reduce it by 2/3 of his pension which is more than my SS benefit so he would get $0.

https://www.ssa.gov/planners/retire/wep.html
https://www.ssa.gov/planners/retire/gpo.html

If you or your spouse do not have a government pension then this will not affect your SS situation.

 

[FI_RElater]

ain’t gettin’ younger

since I’m just shy of 62, but close enough, I voted as if I was— and voted for SS at FRA (but starting in Jan of the next year, since it’s in middle of the year, so as to maximize credits and start them with the credits. If you look closely, the credits don’t actually show until the next year start so it makes more sense to wait until FRA + delay until Jan of the next year)

ran excel, with part of portfolio segregated to account for SS equivalents until start, for both FRA and 70, and really didn’t see but a couple of thousand difference between them. ...and with 3.5% from portfolio, the difference between 11000/mo and 11000+/ month wasn’t significant.

[have pension, paid up house, retiree health insurance (not ACA) etc in MCOL area....and mine is the lower PIA, as well. When that other SS starts.... hmmm, that’s gonna be even harder to spend, especially since we don’t spend nearly that much now and it’s twice what we spent before retirement, and that was with trips including international ones. ]

we need some time to do Roth conversions so that’s why we have to have some delay. want to start first SS to keep the large portfolio in place to give a lot for surviving spouse, as if I pass first, the pension is reduced to 50% and the portfolio needs to be able to take up the slack.

 

[Andre1969]

I'm 48, so still a ways off. Anyway, I'm planning to take it at 62. However, depending on how things go, that's subject to change.

 

[Ian S]

I said Other. I'm between FRA and 70 and have not taken it yet. Because of my particular situation, I plan to take it next January but that's subject to change.

 

[exnavynuke]

I'm under 42 and picked "other" because I'm currently anticipating taking it at 62, BUT I plan on adjusting that based on how my portfolio does between retiring and then. For example, if we have a bad sequence in those early years of my retirement (but not bad enough to go back to work) I'll go ahead and take it at 62 to drop my withdrawal rate. If we're having great returns and I'm having to ratchet up my spending just to not end up dying with a massive amount of money I didn't use, I'll probably keep ratcheting up the spending AND delay SS some (though with my chronic medical condition, "break even" calculations will likely still say to take it somewhere before 70).

 

[joylesshusband]

Dang it folks!


I plead with those of you not yet receiving SS benefits to seriously reconsider and postpone until you are 70. Or beyond.
Please, give it some further thought. And then some more.

Otherwise, you are going to bankrupt the system and there won't be much left for when my turn comes to pay out my benefits....

 

[RunningBum]

?? It's basically a neutral decision, whether to take SS at 62 or 70 or anytime in between. That's why the gov lets us choose. A lot of people taking at 62 isn't going to bankrupt the system anymore than taking a larger payout at 70.

 

[NW-Bound]

?? It's basically a neutral decision, whether to take SS at 62 or 70 or anytime in between. That's why the gov lets us choose. A lot of people taking at 62 isn't going to bankrupt the system anymore than taking a larger payout at 70...

... if there's any money left in the "lock box" when you get to 70.

 

[SheitlQueen]

I am 63 and currently receive widow's ss benefits. When I turn 70 I'll switch to my own which will be much higher.

I also am playing the ACA income game and will until I turn 65 and switch over to medicare.

 

[mountainsoft]

My wife and I are both planning to take social security at 62. I've run various scenarios in "Flexible Retirement Planner" and it actually works out better for us to start taking SS early. Starting later boosts our income in our 80's and 90's (if we make it that long), but it causes our savings to get uncomfortably low while we wait to take SS.

We're planning to retire when I'm 60 and she's 55. We'll live off my wife's pension and my IRA until I can claim SS at 62. That will reduce our IRA withdrawals until she can claim at 62. After that we won't need the IRA anymore and it can just grow in the background for unplanned expenses later in life.

Of course, if my IRA performs better than planned, we may be able to delay taking SS. We'll just have to wait and see where we are at the time.

 

[eytonxav]

Will be 69 in June, and took my SS at the beginning of 2018.

 

[Niuatoputapu]

Suggest you ignore the following unless you are interested in WEP and GPO

I voted "under 62 and starting SS at 70", though I include the "can change my mind at any time" rider. DW, now 62, will start whenever she retires. Her school system pension makes her SS subject to WEP, so her SS will be less than $500/month.

Waiting until 70 is longevity insurance, but more importantly, it is spousal survivor benefits. The survivor benefits would be almost negated by GPO (due to her pension) if I take an age 62 benefit. However, my SS benefits will grow more between age 62 and 70 than 2/3rds (part of the GPO calculation) of her pension growth. Thus, there will be much more for her to claim from my benefits if I wait until 70 (and die before her).

 

[Silver]

I voted "other" because for married folks it's really two questions with possibly very different answers resulting from two separate optimization problems.

This. I am 66 and my DH 65. I started SS last year at FRA 66, and DH will claim 50% of my SS at his 66th birthday in January 2019. (We squeaked by before that advantage was cut off.) Then DH will claim his own SS at age 70. If he should die first I'll then claim the higher amount.

Life is good.

 

[kimcdougc]

I voted for Other.

I am under 62 and plan to evaluate year by year once I turn 62. If the portfolio is doing well I will hold off on taking SS until FRA. If we enter a bear and my portfolio drops to a level where I am not comfortable selling assets, I will start Social Security.

+1

 

[H2ODude]

This. I am 66 and my DH 65. I started SS last year at FRA 66, and DH will claim 50% of my SS at his 66th birthday in January 2019. (We squeaked by before that advantage was cut off.) Then DH will claim his own SS at age 70. If he should die first I'll then claim the higher amount.

Life is good.

We're basically same but are same age (67) and mine is higher than hers. When hit FRA she took hers, I'm getting half as much. When I turn 70 I will take it on my record. We're using it to a) pay RMD taxes and b) provide longevity for her as my pension dies with me.

 

[SumDay]

I'm taking at 62, DH will be 66 (FRA) shortly thereafter, and he'll take 1/2 mine as a spousal benefit. Yes, we're eligible for this. Then, when he's 70, he'll take his after it's percolated for a few years. Just in time for RMD's to kick in.

 

[whaleknives]

Retired at 64-1/2 in 2015, but using savings until 70 to maximize SS for my spouse and self. Before SS I'm converting my 401(k)/tIRA to Roth, to avoid a higher tax bracket from SS + RMD's.

I'm well ahead of my 5 lowest FIRECalc cases so far.

 

[Out of Steam]

Under 62 and not yet retired. Plan to postpone until 65, but doubt I'll wait longer.

 

[6miths]

Younger than 62 currently and taking as late as possible. It's bonus money and plan to live a long time. Hopefully in good health.

 

[NW-Bound]

Younger than 62 currently and taking as late as possible. It's bonus money and plan to live a long time. Hopefully in good health.

I have always thought that you are Canadian. If so, is the Canadian system similar to the US regarding benefits getting higher for late claimers?

 

[Yarnstormer]

I will take survivor at 60 (divorced w widow status) and my own at 70.

Really, the numbers would be approx the same if I switched them, but I prefer to let mine grow. I do worry that changes to survivor benefits are coming - seems they keep nibbling at the rules

 

[6miths]

Younger than 62 currently and taking as late as possible. It's bonus money and plan to live a long time. Hopefully in good health.

I have always thought that you are Canadian. If so, is the Canadian system similar to the US regarding benefits getting higher for late claimers?

Yes on being Canadian and yes the Canada Pension Plan is very similar to Social Security. Taking it later means a greater monthly cheque. AFAIK the main differences are that the maximum payout for SS is higher than CPP for high income earners although the governments have been talking about increasing the amounts for the last few years for all incomes (with increased contributions of course) and the second difference is that the Plan is in good shape financially and never discussion about it not existing or reductions in payouts. The age range to start is 60 with full benefits at 65 increasing to a maximum at 70. There have been discussions about increasing the range by 2 years due to longer lifespans but hasn't happened yet. As well there are two other pension plans which are not contribution based - Old Age Security which starts at 65 and the Guaranteed Income Supplement which also starts at 65 for those with low incomes. The effect of the three plans is that poverty in old age is quite low with many low income individuals having a greater income in old age than they did in their working years.

 

[Clone]

DW just turned 62 and began drawing. She is the lower earner, plus, she has some gov income that is not subject to self employment tax if you are drawing SS. I am not quite 62, and plan to draw at 70. Higher earner, thus longevity insurance, higher survivor benefit, and allow for more ROTH conversions. The thing with planning to draw at 70, you always have the option to draw earlier.

 

[97guns]

ASAP, if I could take anything now at 47 I would

 

[tb001]

I voted in the <62 and taking it at 62 category, but maybe should have been other? I voted for us as a family. DH is 54 and we have young kids. After looking into it on the advice I received here, it’s a no brainer for us as a family to start collecting when he turns 62, as long as there are no changes to SS in the interim.