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.
Isn't it really just a question of whether one needs (or would like) the earlier SS payments so they can live the retirement lifestyle they want?
IF all goes as planned, I won't need the earlier SS payments to live the lifestyle I want. So I do plan to wait. And IF I change my mind, I can. Sometimes I think people act like they can't change their mind and start the payments anyway. So what, you thought you'd wait until 70, and it turns out that after thinking about it from 66 to 67, you start the payments. All right it was only one year. Your benefit is higher. You haven't "lost" that much time or money….move on..
Exactly right. Mo money, mo choices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by selhars
A money advisor on the radio just the other day said he advises clients to wait -- if they can. Especially if they're still working. Yet all my coworkers (making more than 100K in salary) who were eligible at 66, are taking the FRA money. They're clearly the 'bird in hand' types. Yet they'll complain about the taxes they're paying. Is the money coming in handy sure. But do they NEED it…even THEY admit, they don't NEED it. But you'd think it was gold the way they giggly talk about getting that extra money.
Well, technically it IS gold. "Found treasure" in their minds. If the market was on a tear, like 2012/2013, and I was past FRA, I'd be tempted to collect my SS just to invest it. Those 30% plus returns those years were intoxicatingly tempting to go all in. But with todays markets.....not so much. The sure thing is better now. Again, its all about choices. If I already have a ton in the market, why not take the best annuity thatbis available by any stretch as part of your income diversity?? It's not all about getting as much in to equities as possible to maximize gains.
any extra money we get may be channeled in to spia's . we already have a lot in investments . over time we want to develop a base income . we may get a payoff this year on the balance from our lease right sale . if we do i may buy an spia with it .
nothing wrong with taking it earlier . it all depends on individual situations . since we need a major portion of income to come from our portfolio i rather make our bet on longevity risk rather than market and interest rate risk and have the bigger ss check ..
if you are heavily dependent on your own investments for the income just realize you are taking a bigger risk and not maximizing what you can draw by taking it earlier . the more depenent you are on your own investments the more powder you have to keep dry for bad market years .
the lack of having any sequence risk with ss allows greater spending if that is one of your wants .
Last edited by mathjak107; 09-02-2016 at 04:18 AM..
I'm leaning toward starting at 62 in a few more years. The reasons are I'm afraid they will put up a wealth/income test to prevent me taking in the future and if I wait to 70 to start drawing, the combination of forced 401K withdrawals, high ss payments, work pension, and investment income would put me into a very high income bracket and I predict the rates will go much higher in the future. So I'm demotivated from continuing to build wealth.
almost everything they changed either had advance notice or if you were of age you were grand fathered in . even the doing away with file and suspend which came out of the blue still had provisions for those who were of age to still do it before the deadline .
Well, my FRA is 67, and:
-- still working at 62, I wouldn't get any money anyway, it'd all be withheld, so 62 is out
-- retiring at 65 (as soon as I can get Medicare) , but taking SS still would mean taking it at less than FRA, so that's not really a preference either
(I'd work part time, or heck even under the table (shhhh), before I took early Soc Sec.
-- I have two years from 65 to FRA of 67 to live off just my pension (if I can)
-- And to be honest if I can do that…I may be able to do it until 70, and just wait until then.
-- I change my mind and take at some point between 67 and 70 so be it.
But who knows what the rules, or my job or health, will be between now and 65 even, let alone nine years and after.
^^^^ again, a logical, well thought out, VERSATILE, plan. Nothing set in stone, but a full awareness of options and outcomes. That is all anyone can really do.
Post like TTs above make no sense what so ever. Essentially he has said "Just in case something may happen that might reduce my SS checks, even though there is no indication whatsoever that is happening, I've decided to do what guarantees I get the smallest tax advantaged income possible and lock that in. That will show them"
What is the point of that? If you just WANT to take it at 62, because emotionally you can't handle the thought of never collecting from SS in case you die young....then say it. That was essentially the sole reason my wife filed at 62. The majority of people collect early because they have no choice, and the rest because of the above. There are other reasons, but they are outliers...like having kids very late in life that are still minor age for many years after you are 62. Collecting their SS minor support and yours early is likely a slam dunk, if your income is low.
But for anyone with plenty of income guaranteed for life due to pensions, large safe investment dividends, etc, it makes zero financial sense (if you assume you plan to live to 80) to take it at 62. If you die and would have collected more by taking it at 62, why would it matter. You are dead. If you are quite positive you will die before 80, and want to live significantly larger through that age, and on much less afterwards, go for it! Actuarially it makes little difference what you do, but collecting early and living longer is better for SSA overall than collecting late and living longer, so SSA may get the last laugh....
Last edited by Perryinva; 09-03-2016 at 07:55 AM..
the dumbest financial move seen all the time is people take ss early and then they buy an annuity .
no one should ever consider an annuity unless they delayed ss first .
for the dollars you give up delaying you will never find a annuity that pays as much ,is inflation adjusted and passes to a spouse for anywhere near that price .
OK I'm back and have looked at my notes. Does anyone have a link that I can use to give me my estimated benefits at any point in time? In other words at 65 1 month, 65 and 2 months etc? I had it at one point and here is what my notes/statement says:
Early benefit at 62: $1,658/month
FRA 66/10: $2,336
Age 70: $2,928
My notes (from a link I can no longer find obviously) says if I file at 65 my benefit will be approx $2,050, at 65/1 $2,063 and 65/2 $2,076. That's where I got my $13/month increase.
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.
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.
