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

[Music Lover]

One thing to keep in mind is that the reason that so many people take SS at 62 is that they have no significant savings so they realistically have no other choice. Wealth give you choices that other people don't have, so let's count our blessings.

True. And some people take it early because they would rather have the money now. And if you have a COLA pension and very little investments then there's no reason to wait in most cases.

I'm taking CPP (Canada) at 60 which is the earliest allowable. The break-even for me is about 74, so for 14-15 years I'm ahead, but more importantly I have extra money to enjoy during my healthiest remaining years.

 

[Midpack]

From the graphic that you posted I would say that this audience is much different than the mainstream... those taking at earliest age of 62 are 66% of the mainstream... similarly those taking at FRA is 64% of the mainstream... and those taking at 70 are more than 10X the mainstream.

That 27% of this audience take SS at 62 was a small surprise to me... I would have thought it would be lower.

Fair enough, I didn’t choose my words well. I meant other than age 70, the pattern is somewhat similar. 62 was the largest cohort, etc.

 

[harllee]

$5500/month is a nice chunk of change. Have you done any Roth conversions in your 60s? I am concerned with RMDs since the bulk of my retirement savings is in tax deferred. My current plan is to live off of my taxable account and a relatively small pension after retirement (probably 5 years off) and convert some of the deferred money before collecting social security.

We have done a modest amount of Roth conversions. We had to wait until we got on Medicare at age 65 to do the Roth conversions because we got our insurance through the ACA and did not want to fall off the subsidy cliff. We have fairly large IRAs but we are not too concerned about RMDs because we give quite a bit to charity and we will do that through our IRAs starting this year (DH is reaching 70.5 this year). The charitable gifts from our IRAs will reduce our RMDs.

 

[jkern]

I started at 62. For each dollar of SS I receive is one dollar I don't have to withdraw from my IRA. Considering legislation risk, I would rather spend the government's money instead of mine.

 

[disneysteve]

I started at 62. For each dollar of SS I receive is one dollar I don't have to withdraw from my IRA. Considering legislation risk, I would rather spend the government's money instead of mine.

Fair point.


Isn't it also true that even though your benefit rises each year you delay collecting, that is offset by the smaller number of years you will collect? I assume there's a breakeven point somewhere and if you outlive it, you come out ahead.

 

[Midpack]

Isn't it also true that even though your benefit rises each year you delay collecting, that is offset by the smaller number of years you will collect? I assume there's a breakeven point somewhere and if you outlive it, you come out ahead.

Most studies show the breakevens around age 77 to 83, with lots of caveats. I usually assume about 81.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/13/tho... designed with “actuarial neutrality” in mind.

 

[disneysteve]

Most studies show the breakevens around age 77 to 83, with lots of caveats. I usually assume about 81.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/13/tho... designed with “actuarial neutrality” in mind.

Thanks. That really makes it impossible to know what the right answer is. You could wait until 70, die at 80, and have ended up getting just about the same as you would have had you collected at 62. In fact, if you didn't need the money and invested it for 18 years, you might even come out ahead collecting early.


These are the things that make my head spin.

 

[TheWizard]

My plan was always to wait until age 70, if possible, which seemed prudent due to some familial longevity.

But then, Katsmeow and others on this forum explained how I could take divorced spousal SS, equal to 1/2 of the amount he was getting, at age 66. Then at age 70 I could switch over to the full, unreduced amount of my own SS based on my own work record. So I did that. (THANK YOU!!) Don't know if that is still possible but it was then. What a windfall!

For the poll I said "age 70".

This is exactly what I did and, no, it's not an option for younger folks anymore...

 

[nap470]

Our current plan is for both of us to take SS at 67. Seven years away for me and 10 years for DW who is still working.
As for family history, if I have more of my mom's genetics, then I will make some money on SS. She is 90, her sister lived to almost 101, and her aunt to 105. If I have more of my father's genetics, then the house wins.

 

[Out-to-Lunch]

Thanks. That really makes it impossible to know what the right answer is. You could wait until 70, die at 80, and have ended up getting just about the same as you would have had you collected at 62. In fact, if you didn't need the money and invested it for 18 years, you might even come out ahead collecting early.


These are the things that make my head spin.

Yup. There are lots and lots of things that would be possible to optimize if only you knew your expiration date. SS is just one of them.

 

[disneysteve]

Yup. There are lots and lots of things that would be possible to optimize if only you knew your expiration date. SS is just one of them.

"I know when I'm going to die. My birth certificate has an expiration date." - Stephen Wright.

 

[skipro33]

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.

 

[RASAP]

70 for me, to maximize DW’s SS ongoing after I die.

+1

 

[Music Lover]

Thanks. That really makes it impossible to know what the right answer is. You could wait until 70, die at 80, and have ended up getting just about the same as you would have had you collected at 62. In fact, if you didn't need the money and invested it for 18 years, you might even come out ahead collecting early.


These are the things that make my head spin.

If your only goal is to get the maximum amount of money then you can overthink things and never be happy. Here's another option: Take it at 70 but don't spend it. Invest it wisely and then at 80 you'll have even more per month. Or wait until 90 and there will be even more per month. Sure, I'm being a little silly but the options are endless and you only find out if you "won" when you die.

My plan is simple. I've been retired for 5 years and can start collecting early CPP next year at 60. In my mind I've already won the game...I'm 59, debt free, healthy, in good shape, in a great relationship, and living a happy and fulfilling life. It can only go downhill from here

So the plan is to get the maximum enjoyment of the money during the youngest and healthiest years left so I'm taking CPP early. If I live beyond the break even point the very worst that will happen is that I "made" a few thousand less. So what?

If it was just about the money I could have just worked longer.

 

[SecondCor521]

But then, Katsmeow and others on this forum explained how I could take divorced spousal SS, equal to 1/2 of the amount he was getting, at age 66. Then at age 70 I could switch over to the full, unreduced amount of my own SS based on my own work record. So I did that. (THANK YOU!!) Don't know if that is still possible but it was then. What a windfall!

I believe it is still possible. For me (age 51) it looks like it is age 67 that I can start divorced spousal. Like you, I plan to collect that then switch to my own higher benefit at age 70. ETA: Or maybe not. The SS site seems to say that since I'm too young, the option is no longer there for me.

There may also be divorced widow/widower benefits at an earlier age (age 60 for me). This has not been eliminated by the same law that eliminated the divorced spousal benefit (if Investopedia's article on the subject is to be believed).

(As with all things SS, YMMV depending on when you were born, when your spouse was born, your relative SS benefits, how long your marriage lasted, whether you're remarried, and probably a number of other criteria.)

 

[Dtail]

If your only goal is to get the maximum amount of money then you can overthink things and never be happy. Here's another option: Take it at 70 but don't spend it. Invest it wisely and then at 80 you'll have even more per month. Or wait until 90 and there will be even more per month. Sure, I'm being a little silly but the options are endless and you only find out if you "won" when you die.

My plan is simple. I've been retired for 5 years and can start collecting early CPP next year at 60. In my mind I've already won the game...I'm 59, debt free, healthy, in good shape, in a great relationship, and living a happy and fulfilling life. It can only go downhill from here

So the plan is to get the maximum enjoyment of the money during the youngest and healthiest years left so I'm taking CPP early. If I live beyond the break even point the very worst that will happen is that I "made" a few thousand less. So what?

If it was just about the money I could have just worked longer.

And you are representing the other side of the equation. No other retirement subject has the variety of opinions as this one.

 

[Calico]

And you are representing the other side of the equation. No other retirement subject has the variety of opinions as this one.

You must have missed all the "should I pay off the mortgage?" threads.

 

[Calico]

I will take it at 70.

My non-cola pension more than covers my expenses. I am single so spousal considerations are not an issue.

On my father's side my great-aunts lived to their late 90's, and one lived to 104-ish. I take after that side of the family, so I am hedging my bets and letting my social security grow.

If I don't make it to the "break even" point big whoop. I'll be dead and won't care at that point.

 

[Dtail]

You must have missed all the "should I pay off the mortgage?" threads.

Yeah maybe, haha, but think this one is #1, but you might have hit on #2.

 

[Midpack]

Thanks. That really makes it impossible to know what the right answer is. You could wait until 70, die at 80, and have ended up getting just about the same as you would have had you collected at 62. In fact, if you didn't need the money and invested it for 18 years, you might even come out ahead collecting early.


These are the things that make my head spin.

If your only goal is to get the maximum amount of money then you can overthink things and never be happy. Here's another option: Take it at 70 but don't spend it. Invest it wisely and then at 80 you'll have even more per month. Or wait until 90 and there will be even more per month. Sure, I'm being a little silly but the options are endless and you only find out if you "won" when you die.

My plan is simple. I've been retired for 5 years and can start collecting early CPP next year at 60. In my mind I've already won the game...I'm 59, debt free, healthy, in good shape, in a great relationship, and living a happy and fulfilling life. It can only go downhill from here

So the plan is to get the maximum enjoyment of the money during the youngest and healthiest years left so I'm taking CPP early. If I live beyond the break even point the very worst that will happen is that I "made" a few thousand less. So what?

If it was just about the money I could have just worked longer.

You’re more than welcome to your views but there is no “right” answer, noted in post #1...

 

[Music Lover]

You’re more than welcome to your views but there is no “right” answer, noted in post #1...

I know. But it's the right answer for me.

Funny, no one says "your welcome to your views" to those who want to wait until 70

 

[RunningBum]

Thanks. That really makes it impossible to know what the right answer is. You could wait until 70, die at 80, and have ended up getting just about the same as you would have had you collected at 62. In fact, if you didn't need the money and invested it for 18 years, you might even come out ahead collecting early.

Break even calculations (should) consider investment return on your social security dollars that you take early. Either you don't spend the SS money or you don't deplete some other investments. It really doesn't matter which way, it's all the same pot of money. The numbers can change based on your rate of return assumption, but there is a return on that money. If you aren't able to invest, it means you need the SS money to live, so there's no option but to take it early.

 

[rodi]

My husband is 9.5 years older than me. We were late to marriage and kids... so it was a TOTAL no brainer for him to take it at age 62 - because our kids were under 18 and got dependent benefits. Older son aged off of benefits 2 years ago, younger son will lose benefits in June when he graduates high school. That added benefit made it much more lucrative to take it early - and blew all break even calculations.

For me... at age 59 I have not made any hard decisions. I'm tentatively thinking about starting at 65 for the medicare premium hold harmless issue. (Can't increase medicare b more than SS increases IFF you are collecting SS.) But - I may wait till age 70. Or full retirement age (67).... I'm unlikely to take it sooner than 65... unless I get some terminal disease.

My plan is to be flexible based on circumstances. REwahoo has posted about how when the market collapsed in 2008, he pulled the lever on SS to let him sleep at night and let him leave more $$ in his portfolio. That's an example where being flexible makes sense.

My sister took it at 62. (Reduced) SS and her teachers pension give her a solid floor of income that lets her use her savings for home projects, travel, and future needs. It made sense for her.

 

[gayl]

Definitely 70. I've got a pension that covers me so why not?

 

[Splash]

70 for me (higher wage earner).
Somewhere between 62 - 66 for DH. We are managing income for ACA subsidies and will both be on Medicare when DH is 66.