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)
View Poll Results: At what age did you start receiving social security?
Before 62 13 8.84%
62 63 42.86%
63 6 4.08%
64 7 4.76%
65 11 7.48%
66 22 14.97%
67 4 2.72%
68 4 2.72%
69 1 0.68%
70 13 8.84%
After 70 3 2.04%
Voters: 147. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-24-2017, 07:40 AM
 
71,626 posts, read 71,751,865 times
Reputation: 49225

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by LoriNJ View Post
I have an occupation that I can continue to do for a long time, assuming I stay relatively healthy (by which I mean no terminal illness, or an illness that drastically limits my function). At this point, that is my plan, to continue to work. But it seems like I could start collecting benefits at FRA (66 and 8 months), continue to work, and Social Security would recalculate my benefit each year that I worked beyond FRA (but, I'm assuming, no increase in benefit after age 70). How does that sound for a strategy? (With gratitude to the posters who offer so much helpful information here.)

https://www.ssa.gov/planners/retire/whileworking.html
no , after you file they do not recalculate your benefit if you still work . they only recalculate you at fra if you gave back money working pre fra . once you file game over and what you get is what you get .. hope you have a plan B

Last edited by mathjak107; 08-24-2017 at 07:52 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-24-2017, 08:06 AM
 
6,884 posts, read 7,284,046 times
Reputation: 9786
Mathjack, please explain....

....so you're saying that a person who collects and works from their FRA to 70...once they retire their benefit won't be recalculated up to reflect that they've still been paying into the system? (If that last bit is correct.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 08:07 AM
 
Location: Whidbey Island, WA
12,272 posts, read 11,326,033 times
Reputation: 6119
We are both turn 66 next year. She will file. I will collect 1/2 hers while mine continues to accrue. I will continue to work six months of the year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 10:47 AM
 
71,626 posts, read 71,751,865 times
Reputation: 49225
Quote:
Originally Posted by selhars View Post
Mathjack, please explain....

....so you're saying that a person who collects and works from their FRA to 70...once they retire their benefit won't be recalculated up to reflect that they've still been paying into the system? (If that last bit is correct.)
if you are talking about collecting at 66 and working longer and getting delayed credits added than no .

the only additional you could see is if any of those years while you continue to work are much higher than the 35 years you are already based on which are inflation adjusted . but that is very different than delayed credits which increase you 8% a year after fra . .

.

i did the opposite my amount at 65 was based on the fact i would work until 65 , but i didn't i went part time at 61 and retired at 62 . the difference in amount from those years expecting me to still work was like a buck or 2 . very little was subtracted because i did the reverse and stopped sooner .
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your benefits may increase when you work:
As long as you continue to work, even if you are receiving benefits, you will continue to pay Social Security taxes on your earnings. However, we will check your record every year to see whether the additional earnings you had will increase your monthly benefit. If there is an increase, we will send you a letter telling you of your new benefit amount.

Last edited by mathjak107; 08-24-2017 at 11:07 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2017, 02:47 PM
 
29,782 posts, read 34,871,258 times
Reputation: 11705
66 and 69. 66 spousal benefits and 69 my full benefit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2017, 02:55 PM
 
29,782 posts, read 34,871,258 times
Reputation: 11705
Remember charts with break even points based on what age you start benefits at MAY fail to take in to account a couple of things:

Collecting spousal benefits at age 66 for those of us who were able to. That offsets depending on your spouses benefit in relation to your full how long you have to wait to come out ahead.

What you do with your SS benefit. Is it being invested? Claiming earlier gives you more time to invest and delaying gives you more to invest. Obviously that can impact your break even point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2017, 03:00 PM
 
71,626 posts, read 71,751,865 times
Reputation: 49225
it all depends if the bull continues now or if the bull peters out and starts again years later ,as to which way will be better .

spend down extra assets now delaying and missing the bull can hurt .

on the other hand spending down for 8 years and then needing 70% less from your portfolio because of the bigger check can be a plus if the bull dies out now but picks up down the road
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2017, 04:46 PM
 
4,443 posts, read 2,614,235 times
Reputation: 10352
Age 40.
That's right, age 40, 14 years ago.
I draw SSDI. But what it bought 14 years ago, even with the colas, it doesn't buy now what it did back then.
Makes me worried for retirement.

So, I am now a " working person with disabilities", working as much as I'm physically able to, which should leave me below what they call SGA. Substantial Gain Activity. If I go over, even though it's not comparable, I will lose my benefits for that month. That may cause a problem in 5 week months. But I can earn up to SGA and still collecting for a number of years.
If I calculate right, I will have medicare until age 62, and will have to cover three years before I can get it again at 65.

I've worked on and off, but rarely exceeded or got close to SGA, so it didn't matter. I'm working as much as I physically can do as to boost my social security before it becomes permanent for the rest of my life. It'll be a higher rate then. It will go up for the amount I work now, and has for years before when I worked, otherwise I'd really be screwed for the pittance I get now.

The next time I'll collect, will be 67 if I can keep working until then.

If my OH works until age 70 and retires April 2029, I can follow at 67 in September 2030. That's the closest we can come to retiring together and still maximizing our SS. We will need it to be as high as possible. That's the best we can do for steady income for one source.

Depends on how much we actually inherit, how much we have in retirement and vwhat SS will be at any time between now and 2029 an 2030 as to whether we can do it earlier.

If our plans go well, we may be able to retire permanently sooner. But for now too many variables.

Best of luck to all retiring now and in the future that it adequately support s your life.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2017, 06:08 PM
 
1,066 posts, read 517,177 times
Reputation: 1824
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyDancer View Post
I'm still a long ways away from collecting SS, but these are all considerations for me. I'm in one of those cohorts where the no-brainer conventional wisdom is to delay as long as possible. However, when I actually calculated the break-even years based on my projected benefit amounts (and playing with discount rates), it doesn't happen until around age 80 or later. My grandparents who have passed away so far have died at 73, 71, and 73. The one remaining is 79, not sure how much longer she has. Good health does not seem to run in my family. So "living into my 90's" would not be an entirely safe assumption at this point.

Obviously, it's still too far out to tell, but I'm not comfortable basing my retirement planning around "wait until 70 to collect SS" (assuming that's even an option by then).
The break even is really even later than that.

Let's say you take SS at 62, for 20k a year. Even with a conservative return of 5% you will have amassed about 200k by the time you turn 70. Let's say your SS payment at 70 is 40k instead of 20k (which is generous, the age 70 payout currently is not twice that of the age 62 payout). You will make up the 20k in 10 years, but remembering the compounding ''Rule of 72" it will have only taken a 7.2% annual return to have doubled the original nest egg to 400k (and, of, course, the increased payments of 40k instead of 20k over these 10 years would offset that gain by say 50-60k at 7% return). But you are still considerably ahead at 80, not even. The gap is closing, but it wouldn't take much of a return to push the break even out to age 90.

No thanks. I'm taking it at 62.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2017, 06:15 PM
 
71,626 posts, read 71,751,865 times
Reputation: 49225
here is a nice chart showing your actual return delaying . these are after inflation returns . if one in a couple lives to 90 , which is about a 50/50 chance today the real return of 5.20% rivals a balanced portfolio under the better outcomes but with zero volatility ,no sequence risk and pretty much guaranteed unlike the balanced portfolio .

delaying is not about breaking even . it is about do you want your income more dependent on stock markets ,interest rates and inflation risk or more longevity risk ?

that is the real deal . dead is dead , breaking even is really a puny reason to delay or not . unless you have a pension it boils down to the dependency you want on the source of that income . a 70% bigger check delaying for just 8 years cuts dependency on markets for decades as the draw from your portfolio shrinks by a lot . so that is the real decision .

market risk or longevity risk ???????

we were comfortable in the middle so i filed for age 65 .


Last edited by mathjak107; 08-25-2017 at 06:33 PM..
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
Similar Threads
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