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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-14-2018, 01:51 PM
 
Location: SoCal
13,278 posts, read 6,356,923 times
Reputation: 9900

Advertisements

Honestly, I don’t think it’s a huge difference from 69 to 70.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-14-2018, 06:56 PM
 
Location: OH>IL>CO>CT
5,238 posts, read 8,420,853 times
Reputation: 7191
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
Honestly, I donít think itís a huge difference from 69 to 70.
From FRA to age 70 the increase for delaying is 8% per year. So if age 69 benefit is, say, $2000/month, 8% gets you a $160/month increase in benefit.

To some folks, that's huge; to others, not so much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2018, 07:14 PM
 
Location: SoCal
13,278 posts, read 6,356,923 times
Reputation: 9900
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed303 View Post
From FRA to age 70 the increase for delaying is 8% per year. So if age 69 benefit is, say, $2000/month, 8% gets you a $160/month increase in benefit.

To some folks, that's huge; to others, not so much.
You should read post 28, it states $85 per month tradeoff.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2018, 09:59 PM
 
Location: OH>IL>CO>CT
5,238 posts, read 8,420,853 times
Reputation: 7191
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
Honestly, I donít think itís a huge difference from 69 to 70.
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed303 View Post
From FRA to age 70 the increase for delaying is 8% per year. So if age 69 benefit is, say, $2000/month, 8% gets you a $160/month increase in benefit.

To some folks, that's huge; to others, not so much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewbieHere View Post
You should read post 28, it states $85 per month tradeoff.
Post 28 does not exactly say how many months of delay or what "full" amount the $85 deduction was based on. It was less than a 12 month period. (April to Oct maybe ?)

My post explains the effect of a full 12 month delay (age 69 to 70) on a $2000/month base amount.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2018, 11:24 PM
 
Location: SoCal
13,278 posts, read 6,356,923 times
Reputation: 9900
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed303 View Post
Post 28 does not exactly say how many months of delay or what "full" amount the $85 deduction was based on. It was less than a 12 month period. (April to Oct maybe ?)

My post explains the effect of a full 12 month delay (age 69 to 70) on a $2000/month base amount.
My comment is specific to OP situation. Not some general question. I’m posting in her thread after all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2018, 12:57 AM
 
Location: RVA
2,172 posts, read 1,270,292 times
Reputation: 4492
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed303 View Post
Post 28 does not exactly say how many months of delay or what "full" amount the $85 deduction was based on. It was less than a 12 month period. (April to Oct maybe ?)

My post explains the effect of a full 12 month delay (age 69 to 70) on a $2000/month base amount.
Actually no, it is always 8% of the FRA amount, not the previous year amount. So if $2k/mo @69, assuming FRA of 66 (like OP), then $2000 would be 36 months of .08/12(FRA) plus FRA so 1.24(FRA)=2000 so FRA= 1613.

So for someone that gets $2k/mo@69, a full years delay to 70 is a monthly increase of $129.

SSA allows retroactive filing for a 6 month lump sum not to FRA.

So if the OP LOST $85/mo FROM HER CURRENT full age 69 SS, in order to get that lump sum, that means her 8% FRA increase is $85/6= 14.17/mo. Therefore, since .08/12=0.0067 then 0.0067(FRA)=14.17. So OP’s FRA could be ~ $2125/mo.

So at 69, her SS with delayed credits would be $2125+$510=$2635/mo. But when one gets a retroactive lump sum, they reset their start date to 6 months earlier, so her new rate woukd be for 67&6 months. Therefore her 6 month lump sum would be at THAT rate of 18 months + FRA or 6($2125+255) or $14,280 which “cost” her $85/mo or $1020/yr.

However, it is unclear from her wording if she meant that she “lost” an $85/mo increase had she gone to full age 70, vs the reduction from her “new” age 67&6months rate.

If that is the case, possible, based on her wording of her financials, then the difference of lost $85 would reflect not claiming 18 months of credits, which greatly reduces her calculated FRA to: 85/18=$4.72/mo where FRA(.0067)=4.72 means an FRA of $708/mo, so a 67&6 amount of $793. So she could possibly mean a lump sum of only $4758.

Only she can assess if the lump sum (which may be combined with her earnings for the year and possibly taxed) is worth it. Personally, if one with no other future income is going to collect a lump sum, better to collect the following year, totally untaxed, rather than added to current years income.

Last edited by Perryinva; 11-15-2018 at 01:35 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2018, 07:51 PM
 
1,734 posts, read 1,951,284 times
Reputation: 3901
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed303 View Post
From FRA to age 70 the increase for delaying is 8% per year. So if age 69 benefit is, say, $2000/month, 8% gets you a $160/month increase in benefit.

To some folks, that's huge; to others, not so much.
I understand your position. However: in my view, the framework becomes starkly different once your income from work stops.

When your income from work stops, you have no way to replenish money that you have to spend - other than through Social Security. Therefore, in my view, that extra $160/mo becomes incredibly valuable.

I'm ignoring investment returns. For 2015 and 2018, from what I discern, they were/are purely hypothetical. A circumstance about which I am mightily ticked off. Next time we hit a market top, I am DEFINITELY going to diversify some. But I digress.
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