U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-10-2014, 03:49 PM
 
Location: SoCal desert
8,093 posts, read 13,242,460 times
Reputation: 14870

Advertisements

Quote:
-- Take both my pension and SS at 62 (and perhaps work but not make enough to have the SS docked)
I don't think it would be too hard to warn your employer that when you hit $15479 that you're done working for the year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-10-2014, 04:59 PM
 
Location: Northern panhandle WV
3,007 posts, read 2,175,781 times
Reputation: 6696
[quote=rdflk;35595680]Mathjack, my old friend

IF I were to retire before full retirement age and earn enough to have my SS docked 1 for 2....are you saying the amount I'm docked goes back into MY pot, for MY calculated benefit, and THEN LATER at my full retirement age, my benefit would 'jump' because that docked amount was used to recalculate my FRA benefit.

Example:
right now my projected age 62 benefit is 1,600.
My FRA (67) benefit is 2,400.00
Are you saying that IF I retire and start taking the age 62 benefit of 1,600 -- and part of that is DOCKED due to earning too much....that when I finally DO get to 67....my benefit WON'T be 2,400 but would be HIGHER, because the docked amounts were added back into the FRA benefit formula?"

----------------------
NO you would not get more than 2400 which you would have gotten if you waited to FRA, you would get some amount added to your 1600 because of the amounts docked due to work before FRA. In no case would you get your FRA amount of 2400. Not in your scenario. Sorry about that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2014, 05:05 PM
 
71,759 posts, read 71,853,273 times
Reputation: 49307
your ss would increase at 66 but never reach your full unless you gave back every penny you got because you worked and were over the limit by a lot...

you get credited with time for the money you give back. so if you worked at 62 and they took back 1/2 the money you received that year you would be credited with 6 months time back.

if that happened from 62 to 66 every year you would get credited with 2 years time . so at full retiirement age you would get recalculated as if you retired at 64 and not 62.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2014, 05:51 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles area
14,018 posts, read 17,754,097 times
Reputation: 32309
Default Everyone? Really?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caltovegas View Post
My plan is to technically be able to retire ASAP. Age isn't a factor. At 62 I'm taking it. I think everyone should look at or plan to retire as soon as they can. It just doesn't make sense to work to the grave or collapse on the job and not be able to enjoy life........
I think your plan is great - for you. It fits your desires and values. I see nothing wrong with it.

But why do you write "everyone"? Many people "enjoy life" while working, not least because they enjoy their jobs and derive much satisfaction and gratification from working.

Why is it so difficult to understand that not everyone is like us? I love classical music but I am under no illusion that everyone does. Likewise, you should be open to the idea that some people are not in any great hurry to be retired because they are already enjoying life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2014, 06:29 PM
 
2,429 posts, read 3,227,603 times
Reputation: 3330
thanks got it .....any adjustment or bump at FRA (67) is added to or raises the $1,600 (because that the amount I started taking early at 62)

(unless I do paybacks) but basically any colas, adjustments or bumps are on the base age 62 benefit I first started taking early...1,600.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-10-2014, 09:36 PM
 
3,245 posts, read 4,375,621 times
Reputation: 2541
Quote:
Originally Posted by LivingDeadGirl View Post
my cheap, DEAD, ex-husband who made our life miserable saving every penny, running my house into the ground because he was too tight to pay for repairs, who yelled at me "every penny YOU spend is money I can't save". I divorced him and he dropped dead at age 57 leaving about a million dollars to his sister.
I'm sure your Ex spoke highly of you, as well.
How was it your house? Half was his, right? You could have spent your money on the house, if you had any income.
Also, didn't you get half of the marital assets in the divorce? So, if he turned his share into a million, and you turned yours into doodly, who was the smarter one?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2014, 04:45 AM
 
Location: Mount Airy, Maryland
10,471 posts, read 5,939,796 times
Reputation: 16170
I'm continuing to decide between filing at 62 or FRA of 66/10 in my case. First off let's stop posting that the benefits increase by 8% per year. That is from FRA to age 70, from 62-FRA it is more like 5%.

So the option is file early or withdraw from my retirement account. Seeing as my retirement account probably will generate more than 5% why would I not strongly consider filing at 62 while allowing my retirement account to continue to grow?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2014, 05:29 AM
 
71,759 posts, read 71,853,273 times
Reputation: 49307
lots of reasons for waiting , from guaranteed income down the road, possibly no

dependency down the road on markets and rates as withdrawals from savings drop

very very low once a payment 89% higher kicks in ,larger survivor benefits, spousal

benefit combos ,and the list goes on and on, your own investing would be taking a high risk investment vs social security a no risk investment.
.

there are many reasons for waiting .

the best reason may be depleting those taxable ira's at possibly zero tax if you plan around keeping withdrawals under 22k for a couple, or only 4.5% effective tax rate on up to 42k.

collect early and the combined total may make everything taxable and much higher rates.


there are also reasons taking it early including interaction with rmds later on that create tax torpedos with those much larger payments, health , need etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2014, 05:39 AM
 
16,437 posts, read 19,150,535 times
Reputation: 9518
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
lots of reasons for waiting , from guaranteed income down the road, possibly no dependency down the road on markets and rates as withdrawals from savings drop very very low once a payment 89% higher kicks in , survivor benefits, spousal benefit combos ,and the list goes on and on.

there are many reasons for waiting .

the best reason may be depleting those taxable ira's at possibly zero tax if you plan around keeping withdrawals under 22k for a couple, or only 4.5% effective tax rate on up to 42k.

collect early and the combined total may make everything taxable.


there are also reasons taking it early including interaction with rmds later on that create tax torpedos with those much larger payments, health , need etc.
Good points. I am thinking of having my wife defer taking her spousal SS at 62 until FRA. The reason is that I have to take minimum distributions from my 401K now and that already puts us into the income range that taxes our SS income. Her spousal benefit would make it even worse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2014, 05:40 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,745 posts, read 4,222,137 times
Reputation: 6866
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveinMtAiry View Post
I'm continuing to decide between filing at 62 or FRA of 66/10 in my case. First off let's stop posting that the benefits increase by 8% per year. That is from FRA to age 70, from 62-FRA it is more like 5%.

So the option is file early or withdraw from my retirement account. Seeing as my retirement account probably will generate more than 5% why would I not strongly consider filing at 62 while allowing my retirement account to continue to grow?
If you are willing to take the "probable" generation of more than 5% versus the "guaranteed" generation of 5% that also provides you with an option of generating 8% post FRA, then go for it.

OTOH, if your FRA is 66 and 10 months, you're wasting your time trying to figure out at what age you should apply for your retirement benefits. By the time you reach 62, you and your spouse will have a better picture, albeit imperfect, of your health, your finances and the inevitable changes that will impact both Social Security and Medicare benefits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top