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.
A co-worker swears up and down it's worth taking Social Security early at 62 (even though HE didn't to that.)
I just want to know is HE right, or and I right.
If a single person's early/age 62 Soc. Sec benefit would be 1,700 a month (projected of course).
And that person takes that -- BUT keeps working and makes 100K gross a year…..
By the time $1 for every $2 over 25K in earnings is held back -- won't the person end up getting no check, or hardly any?
Is my math off???
The co-worker swears up and down it's worth it to collect early at 62 and keep working, because you'll get that Soc Sec. check -- and the continued earnings will keep going into your future benefit…so by the time you reach FRA or do retire, your benefit will be recalculated UP and it could be like you never took the early benefit.
I keep trying to tell him that works IF you get to FRA -- THEN collect and keep working.
That's what he's doing started collecting at FRA, and continues to work.
I keep trying to tell him I'M talking about collecting EARLY at 62 -- and there's really no benefit if you lose all your check because of the $1 for $2 rule….but he swears he's right, and I'm wrong.
Maybe I am, but I need it explained, because right ow I think HE is the one who doesn't know what he's talking about.
Who is correct?
Neither is correct, quit trying to force your needs and opinions on each other. You and your coworker have different circumstances, goals, and philosophies.
It's not a one-size-fits-all situation.
I retired 4 years ago at age 62; DH retired 3 years ago at age 62. Neither of us yet has filed for SS. That was exactly the right decision for us.
OP, the withheld money is not all permanently lost. After full retirement age they will re-compute your benefit to reflect the fact that money was withheld, but it may take many years to recoup it all. But it makes no sense to me to take the benefit at age 62 if one is still working full time; why fool with having part of it or all of it withheld when one can wait until full retirement age (or until one does retire) and thereby get a larger benefit?
I took my SS at 62, but I was done with full time work by then and the part time work I was piddling around with, more for fun than to earn money, was not ever going to be enough to reach the SS threshhold (as low as it is) for withholding the benefit.
I say the OP is right and that Bisuitmom completely misunderstood the issue he was raising.
There is no one single "right" answer for everybody when navigating all the rules and prospective cash flow from SS.
In addition to all the financial scenarios that can play out, there can be unique health issues to deal with.
For example, somebody with medical issues that could be leading to a demise in their mid-60's or so would be better off to start collecting at age 62. Putting off SS could lead to not collecting much of their earned benefit.
As well, many folk have job/career paths where they aren't earning very much in their 60's, so the penalties for earnings then may not be significant.
Likely the only person who can assess the scenarios properly for anybody is their accountant, and even then ... there's variables beyond the control of the person which can only be decided by a "best" guess.
A co-worker swears up and down it's worth taking Social Security early at 62 (even though HE didn't to that.)
I just want to know is HE right, or and I right.
If a single person's early/age 62 Soc. Sec benefit would be 1,700 a month (projected of course).
And that person takes that -- BUT keeps working and makes 100K gross a year…..
By the time $1 for every $2 over 25K in earnings is held back -- won't the person end up getting no check, or hardly any?
Is my math off???
The co-worker swears up and down it's worth it to collect early at 62 and keep working, because you'll get that Soc Sec. check -- and the continued earnings will keep going into your future benefit…so by the time you reach FRA or do retire, your benefit will be recalculated UP and it could be like you never took the early benefit.
I keep trying to tell him that works IF you get to FRA -- THEN collect and keep working.
That's what he's doing started collecting at FRA, and continues to work.
I keep trying to tell him I'M talking about collecting EARLY at 62 -- and there's really no benefit if you lose all your check because of the $1 for $2 rule….but he swears he's right, and I'm wrong.
Maybe I am, but I need it explained, because right ow I think HE is the one who doesn't know what he's talking about.
Who is correct?
if they are earning enough pre fra to wipe away the ss check in give backs then they accomplished nothing . it is the same had they delayed with the exception of the fact that they will not be covered under medicare's hold harmless law if they did not file if they reach medicare age .
for every years worth of checks you give back they just recalculate you at fra as if you had filed that much later .
the bad part of filing is if say at 63-65 you decided to stop working and filed then , you would get the higher rate right then .
if you already filed then you have to wait to fra to get recalculated .
Last edited by mathjak107; 01-24-2016 at 04:58 AM..
Thanks Mathjack and Escort. You get what I was saying. It makes no sense to take it early -- IF you make so much you have the early benefit wiped out. (withheld for later of course).
Is my math correct, that a 100K gross salary for a SINK person, wipes out the early benefit (again, withheld for later).
If the 1 for 2, is for everything over 25K…..and you make 100K….isn't all of a 1,700 early benefit withheld??
You ever have a conversation with a person…and you can't get them to see -- uh…they're wrong. It's a friendly work conversation but he can be stubborn at times…me too, though. A few of us were in a group. And everyone else got what I was saying -- but him. Who THINKS he's Mr. Soc Sec. expert because he's already filed, is collecting and still working.
I keep trying to tell him -- uh -- YOU are already AT your FRA!!! (dummy!) You're talking about one situation. I'm talking about another! So I ask him, if it's such a good idea, why didn't YOU file early at 62? 'He says "uh, well I din't need the money." That's when I tried to tell him…stupid…at your salary level you wouldn't have GOTTEN any early benefit, by the time they did the withholding.
(( I don't literally SAY 'stupid' and 'dummy'…I'm just thinking it)
There is no one single "right" answer for everybody when navigating all the rules and prospective cash flow from SS.
In addition to all the financial scenarios that can play out, there can be unique health issues to deal with.
For example, somebody with medical issues that could be leading to a demise in their mid-60's or so would be better off to start collecting at age 62. Putting off SS could lead to not collecting much of their earned benefit.
As well, many folk have job/career paths where they aren't earning very much in their 60's, so the penalties for earnings then may not be significant.
Likely the only person who can assess the scenarios properly for anybody is their accountant, and even then ... there's variables beyond the control of the person which can only be decided by a "best" guess.
OP... There are at least a half dozen threads about this topic. Shall I start to list them? Please do a search and you will see a ton of info and opinions pro/con.
The topic is not about when to take SS, whether at 62 or at 70 or somewhere in between. The topic is taking SS before full retirement age while one is still working full time. That is not the same thing at all. In other words, the topic is how the SS earnings limitation (in effect only for those not yet at full retirement age) works. This is not a question of "opinion", but is a factual question. It is really staggering how often people do not really read an original post (perhaps they just skim it and assume they understood?) and then shoot from the hip.
A co-worker swears up and down it's worth taking Social Security early at 62 (even though HE didn't to that.)
I just want to know is HE right, or and I right.
If a single person's early/age 62 Soc. Sec benefit would be 1,700 a month (projected of course).
And that person takes that -- BUT keeps working and makes 100K gross a year…..
By the time $1 for every $2 over 25K in earnings is held back -- won't the person end up getting no check, or hardly any?
Is my math off???
The co-worker swears up and down it's worth it to collect early at 62 and keep working, because you'll get that Soc Sec. check -- and the continued earnings will keep going into your future benefit…so by the time you reach FRA or do retire, your benefit will be recalculated UP and it could be like you never took the early benefit.
I keep trying to tell him that works IF you get to FRA -- THEN collect and keep working.
That's what he's doing started collecting at FRA, and continues to work.
I keep trying to tell him I'M talking about collecting EARLY at 62 -- and there's really no benefit if you lose all your check because of the $1 for $2 rule….but he swears he's right, and I'm wrong.
Maybe I am, but I need it explained, because right ow I think HE is the one who doesn't know what he's talking about.
Who is correct?
It depends on so many things...For me, since I suffered a heart attack at 50, I am hoping to make 62...Then it's on my butt as it could be reasoned I might not make 67.....That's why I'd take it....If you're healthy, vigorous and happy working, then do so!
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.
