If you're at full SS retirement age, get on SS.

[MineralMan]

I have a relative who is now 68 years old, unemployed, and in pretty poor health. She refuses to sign up for Social Security because "If I wait, I'll get more." She's on Medicare, but is paying the Part B premiums out of pocket. She never has enough money to get by, since she doesn't and really can't work. Her poor health makes her unemployable.

If she waits much longer, she'll die without ever getting a Social Security payment. That's clear to the rest of us, but she cannot be convinced. She wants the maximum benefit, no matter what. I fear she'll get nothing at all, since SS doesn't pay after you're dead.

So, please don't make that mistake. When you're fully eligible, take the benefits you have earned. You never know when your time will run out.

[Walleye]

1. Do the math. See how many years it will take for deferring sign up make a difference

[MineralMan]

4. Exactly.

[Voltaire2]

32. if you have a spouse and you don't plan on dying before you reach 81 or so

and your potential ss benefits are significantly higher than your spouse, then the optimal strategy is to defer your benefits to 70, have your spouse claim their benefits at full retirement age, and you claim your spousal benefit (50% of theirs) as soon as they file.


Of course if you croak before 81 you f'd up, but you are very unlikely to care at that point.

[Native]

61. They did away with this option several years back. We were planning on doing this,

and we lost more than 50 grand when this "option" was removed. It was considered a loophole that needed to be closed.

[Voltaire2]

145. It remains open for those of us born

before 1954.

[Native]

146. Way to rub it in, Voltaire! LOL.

[Voltaire2]

147. Sorry.

Every “reform” of social security seems to be just screwing us more.

[fescuerescue]

128. The hard part - the most important variable in that equation

Isn't known until you are dead.

[Walleye]

129. A sad but true fact

[jmbar2]

2. Agree completely

Full retirement age = the age when you become unemployable

[Merlot]

10. "The age when you become unemployable" is usually lower than 65.

People who are 55+ don't have any safety net.

[IrishAfricanAmerican]

46. True, I'm 60 and...

have been out of work for two years. I've not only not been able to find job opportunities at my previous salary, (impossible,) but, due to COVID, I haven't found anything at all.

I'm definitely planning on starting SS at 62 and work under the allowed cap to make up some of the difference.

[ShazzieB]

67. I was 58 in 2008.

Like a lot of people at the time, I lost my job when the economy went *pffft*. I tried like hell for the next 4 years to get another "permanent" full time job, but was only able to find short term temporary gigs, some of which involved long, expensive commutes.

When I turned 62, I signed up for SS benefits, because the idea of having a regular sum of money (even a small one) coming in that I could rely on was irrestible. (I won't even try to describe how beat to shit my self confidence was by that time; suffice it to say it was pretty bad.)

I felt guilty at the time for not holding out for a few more years, but I don't anymore. We needed that money, damn it, and I just couldn't anymore with begging employers to hire me and being rejected, over and over and over and... you get the picture.

I'm one of those people who never really "recovered" from the 2008 recession and stopped being counted among the unemployed because I stopped actively looking for a job. Sometimes I wonder how many of us there are.

Nowadays, when I have to fill out a form that asks for my employment status, I check "retired." I don't really feel like I retired, though. I always thought of retirement as being a voluntary thing. I never had a chance to choose to retire; I feel like the job market wadded me up and threw me away like a used kleenex. And yes, I guess I am still a little bitter about it!

[IrishAfricanAmerican]

72. Yep...

you nailed it. That is also my experience. At this time I consider myself "involuntarily retired." Same on feeling tossed away by my last job. I had planned to work there until I was 70.

I have had a bunch of interviews and calls. Right before COVID hit, I had an opportunity with a former customer of my last job but that dried as soon as the pandemic arrived.

sigh...

[OldBaldy1701E]

119. Never be apologetic for accessing funding that you put in there in the first place.

I have been out of work for over seven years now. My health is a main part of it. I tried to get SSDI (disability) but was basically told to fuck off. Now I just wait. Bitter? You have no idea...

[CTyankee]

140. I chose the option of waiting til I was 64 and some months (I forget how many, maybe 3)

because I was anticipating that my new boss would get rid of me as well as everybody who was nearing retirement. Her age bias was not as well planned as she wished. Soon every woman in the organization over the age of 60 was let go (she tried to hide it behind "department re-organizaiton." I told my co-workers of my looming retirement and that saved me. Lesson: if you do this, be sure you let your entire department know when you'll be reitiring. That way, the boss will look like she was firing due to age discrimination.

She was soon fired by the Board of Directors.

[twodogsbarking]

115. I interviewed for a job with a free legal aid group at age 50.

The interviewer ask how much longer I intended to work. They hired someone far less qualified but twenty years younger.
Age discrimination from the group that is supposed to protect people.

[TheBlackAdder]

138. Most corporate employers view 55 as the cut-off since there are benefit plans involved.

.

I'm in that window, of being over 55. I have a corporate gig and if I lose it, I won't be able to get another one easily. I may have to turn to contracting, as companies don't really want to invest in older employees who will be out the door in less than a decade.

A group of people bailed and took packages just before turning 55 because of this and got hired elsewhere.

I was just under the package requirements, so I couldn't take advantage of it. One was full paid healthcare until retirement.

.

[leftieNanner]

3. Good Advice MM

I was going to wait to take SS, but when I was 62, my husband was laid off his job and for medical reasons I couldn't work. Ultimately, I will be making less per month but that money sure came in handy at the time.

[MineralMan]

7. I also started receiving benefits at 62.

The poor economy at the time, along with the work I did drying up, made it necessary. After that, I limited my earnings to stay under the maximum earned income allowed. In the four years before I was 66, I got over $50,000 in benefits, money that helped my wife and I stay afloat. Even after things improved, I worked less than before to maintain the lower income. My wife did the same when she turned 62. We never know how long we'll live. Get your benefits while you're still alive.

[RVN VET71]

135. If you've reached your FRA (66 or 67)your earnings do not affect your social security benefit.

[Nay]

23. I had planned to work until 65, but I got breast cancer at 61. We had saved enough

money that I could afford to retire from work, and when I turned 62 I started taking SS because I certainly had no guarantee that the breast cancer wasn't going to come roaring back and kill me. I was lucky in that I had worked long enough at my workplace that I was able to take their retiree health insurance -- few people get that privilege.

As it turned out, it's 10 years later and I'm still kicking. Sure, I could have gotten a bigger payout if I had taken SS at 66.5, but there was a measurable chance that I would not live that long.

[Fritz Walter]

65. Happened to me, too!

Got laid off when I was 62, and I weighed the pros and cons of drawing early benefits. Using an Excel spreadsheet, I compared the projected SS payments for three different scenarios:
1. Start drawing then, with reduced benefits;
2. Wait until 65, and draw normal benefits; or
3. Wait until I was eligible for max benefits (and hope SS -- and I -- would still be around by then).

The break-even point -- where I would have cumulatively drawn the same amount, whether early or late -- would have been when I reached 82 years of age. And there was absolutely no guarantee that I'd live that long.

Meanwhile, the cost of health insurance was exorbitant. Before I started drawing Medicare benefits, I was paying almost $800/month for a crappy HMO plan, and was working two part-time jobs just to break even.

Jumped on the early draw, and then fully retired when I hit 65 and Medicare kicked in.

[leftieNanner]

68. Well Done!!

I had to do the crappy insurance thing for three years too. $900/month. I got a bit of a subsidy from the ACA which helped. The last year before Medicare kicked in, my youngest child stopped being a dependent - making us a 2 person household instead of 3. The IRS made me pay back the whole year's subsidy at tax time - $7,500! That was painful.

[phylny]

81. I took mine at 62, and my husband just

started getting his at 66 and a few months.

We are happy with our decisions.

[GoodRaisin]

148. Another 62 here

Not great health caused me to retire @61. I had to wait 7 months to get to 62 and draw my SS. Obamacare then carried me over the finish line to Medicare at 65.

[secondwind]

5. I retired at 50. Began collecting at the earliest possible time,

which was 62. Still collecting 13 years later, and not regretting it one bit.

[ProfessorGAC]

40. 62 Here, Too

The math was pretty straightforward.
If I waited until FRA, the money I already got would require me getting the higher amount until I was slightly over 82.
82 years, 2 months TO BREAK EVEN, not accounting for Time Value of Money. (A dollar now is worth more than a dollar 10 years from now.)
There's no way for anybody to be sure they'll live to 82, especially someone with my family history of lifespan.
So, I took it 63 months early (this is my 3rd year) and regret it, not one bit.

[Hekate]

6. KnR

[dsc]

8. My current plan is to get to 67 or 70

since both my job's retirement and SS would be more. But if my health doesn't allow it, then I will have to do what I can.

[mahina]

64. Same situation here

I can see how it makes sense for MM’s relative but I’m still working and I like it. I have a lot more that I want to do.

When I need it I’ll be very thankful for it

[Ocelot II]

9. I agree. Take it if you need it; don't delay in order to get more later

if you need it now or if you don't want to dip into other funds. I started collecting it shortly after I took an early retirement from my job, even though I'd get larger monthly payments if I waited; after doing the math I concluded I'd be better off in the long run if I left my retirement savings alone as long as possible and relied as much as possible on SS. Everybody's situation is different, but the system is basically betting that you won't live long to collect everything you put into it, which is why if you wait until you're 70 the monthly payments will be larger. They figure that you might not make it to 70, or if even you do, you won't live long enough to get all of it. If you don't need it until then, so much the better; but it seems insane to live in poverty while waiting for the maximum benefit to kick in.

[Merlot]

18. Seems insane to live in poverty while waiting for the maxi benefit to kick in.

So true.

[Dream Girl]

11. Don't you max out at 67? It doesn't even seems she benefits from waiting.

[spooky3]

19. You max out at 70. Benefits increase 8% per year you wait

Between 62 and 70.

[former9thward]

21. Max is 70.

[MineralMan]

31. No. If you wait, the payment goes up until, I think, 70.

All of those numbers are available to anyone with a SS#. You can easily do the math if you look at your odds of living to a certain age. The real question is whether having monthly benefits now will make a material difference in your life now, once you're 62 or older. The math will tell the story.

The bottom line is that you will receive monthly benefits until you die, once you start receiving them. If you need them now, get them now. If you don't, you can defer for now.

[Random Boomer]

127. I've decided to wait until age 70

I turn 68 in a few months, but I'm still working and making a comfortable salary, which is supplemented by my wife's SS. My health isn't all that good, but working from home has made such a difference that I don't feel the need to stop working. Also, I'm loathe to give up my medical benefits because they're excellent (paid for open heart surgery and lots of complications with only $2,050 out of pocket).

If I get SS now, I'll just end up paying higher taxes, which would probably wipe out most (if not all), the benefit of getting it earlier than I need it at a lowered payout. If I wait until age 70, when I stop working, I'll avoid the tax issue and get the maximum payment.

[spooky3]

12. SS payments are actuarially determined. I believe SS uses a target life

Expectancy (around 83) so that if you die before that average LE, you will lose money, but if you live longer, you cash in. The expected actuarial value is the same at all of one’s ages (up to age 70).

If you defer benefits, your monthly benefits obviously will be higher than if you take them earlier, because you have fewer years to receive benefits (including COLAs) to the average life expectancy age.

So, your advice may make sense for your relative, but not for the average person who expects to live past the average LE AND can afford to defer the payouts up to age 70 (benefits do not increase if you were to defer them past 70, so it’s not a good idea for anyone to try to do that).

[dawg]

13. If you can afford it,and are in good health and likely to live longer than the average ...

it can really pay off to wait until age 70.

When you need the money earlier, or there are health issues, it makes sense to claim earlier.

It really depends on the individual circumstances.l

[mcar]

14. I started this year, at 62

Both my parents died at age 62. I'm superstitious.

[Siwsan]

15. My financial advisor AND tax guy urged me not to wait until 'full retirement age' to sign up

Of course, I listened. Signing up earlier means I'll collect longer so that pretty much mitigates waiting for 'full payout' age.

[ProfessorGAC]

43. Repeating This, But Worthwhile

If I waited to full retirement age, I'd have to live to 82 years, 2 months to break even. (The higher amount minus what I get now * 14+ years)
SSA uses 83 as the actuarial basis. If I hit that mark, I'd take a reduced rate for 10 months.
Much better to have it now! The math was appallingly obvious.

[llmart]

91. I took mine at 63.

Never regretted it. At the time the monthly check came in handy, but shortly thereafter I got a good, part-time job which allowed me to only work up to the max without being penalized by SS. If you even go over the limit by $1, you have to pay an entire month's stipend back. Yes, you eventually get your amount readjusted somewhere down the line, but it's better not to go over the limit.

Also, like myself, if you don't really need the money to live on, you can save it and invest it. If you invest it well, you may even come out farther ahead than if you waited to 70 for a larger benefit. I understand that most people probably wouldn't do that. I just lived on my part time salary and put the SS money into my IRA each year.

[dsc]

97. Can I take early benefits and still work?

Given my state retirement I definitely want to work the extra years.

[ProfessorGAC]

100. It's Quite Limited

It's only $18,960 a year allowed. If you exceed that, you owe SSA $1 for every $2 over the limit.
The intent is to allow an early retiree to have some supplemental income, but nothing close to full time work.
The operative word for them seems to be "retiree".
I don't think they want people taking early then still working full employment.
So, they set the max quite low to make it very unattractive.

[TxGuitar]

109. Once you reach your FRA

You are not penalized and can work as much as you want. My sister-in-law who is 67 and FRA was 66 collects SS and is working full time to pay off bills. Plans to retire in 2 years

[redstatebluegirl]

16. I took mine at 62, and went part time until last December when I took full retirement.

[Dream Girl]

24. How do you go part time? Do you just paid a part of your benefits and then work part time.

[wolfie001]

34. From the SS website:

If you are under full retirement age for the entire year, we deduct $1 from your benefit payments for every $2 you earn above the annual limit. For 2021, that limit is $18,960.

[vsrazdem]

44. I started mine in January even though I did not turn 66 until September, therefore

I did not have to have anything deducted from benefit payments, since it was not a full year and I was making less than required (I think its something like 45,000 in your last year). I am very happy that I did. I am still working, but this has been very helpful in paying off my debt. I still have to pay taxes on some of my SS, but its worth it.

[wolfie001]

88. Enjoy!!!

You've earned it!

[redstatebluegirl]

99. There was a part time job offered in my department after I had left to retire.

It paid me less than the 17,000 so I was ok doing that. I was out of work for 2 years waiting for the part time job though. Not a lot of them out there.

[csziggy]

17. If waiting will affect your health it's not worth it

My husband retired at 62 and started collected SS. He'd been working mostly for health insurance so when ACA kicked in and we could get insurance without him working, he quit. Working was increasing his stress level dangerously and his health was suffering. Fortunately with the ability to get health coverage we could afford for him to retire.

After three years of mediocre coverage through an ACA Blue Cross/Blue Shield policy we went to Medicare with an excellent supplemental.

I wish you could convince your relative to take SS - having them pay for Medicare and Part D drug coverage is wonderful!

[Evolve Dammit]

89. We signed Mom up for an AARP Medicare Supplemental and it saved everything. What plan did you get?

[llmart]

94. I can answer that from my perspective.

I have AARP Medicare Supplemental plan from United Healthcare - Plan G - and it's a godsend. I have no health issues except for wet macular degeneration in one eye. Outside of the $183 deductible which I paid, they pay everything else. One shot in your eye is over $2,000 and I had to have one every month for almost a year.

[Evolve Dammit]

108. We had Plan G as well. And yes, a Godsend. Mom had multiple surgeries for hundreds of thousands

It covered everything. I will be signing up as well. As I recall, it was in the middle of the AARP Medicare "wrap-around" plans. Not the best, not the worst, and affordable. That was over 25 years ago. I think Prudential was the underwriter at the time. Thanks for sharing the info.

[MOMFUDSKI]

20. I believe the 83-yrs-old rule

still applies. If you start at age 62 and don't make 83 then you have come out ahead. If you surpass 83 then you will have screwed yourself. No crystal ball here so hubby and I both started at 62 because economy was bad and work drying up. We are 73 now so who knows? No biggy.

[Ms. Toad]

22. It's not a one-size fits all calculation.

Your health, family history, current employment status, anticipated benefits (and increase per year you delay), and other resources all play a role.

The advice to do the math makes perfect sense. The advice to everyone to take SS now does not.

[Native]

55. So true, and it's not just the extra 8% you get each year you delay, income earned in those later

years also ramps up your benefit because those higher paying years replace the earlier years used in the calculation of your benefit amount (they use the 35 years in which you made the most). Before making any formal decision, one should definitely read a primer on social security benefits and use SSA's online benefit calculator. The calculator allows you to "try on" various scenarios, and it is super easy to use.

[Ms. Toad]

57. Excellent advice. n/t

[Random Boomer]

132. This was one of my concerns

Starting about five years ago, a series of hefty salary increases kicked in. Even dropping down to 30 hours this past year, my current salary is well above what I've made for the majority of my life. I'm comfortable now, still socking money away without even sense of daily deprivation. So my thought was that as long as I don't need the money now, it wouldn't hurt to wait until the 70 cutoff.

[Captain Zero]

83. at 65 I know payment is based on last 36 years

Of income. Not sure about the other ages.
But I would rather have had ages 62, 63, 64, in my averages than ages 25, 26, 27. Although average may have not been much different.

[Ms. Toad]

92. My calculation is pretty complicated.

I have money in the State Teacher's Retirement System - which both zero-fills those years (dropping my average) - and deducts from the payments because I have other money coming in retirement. It really stinks - do one or the other - don't penalize me twice for the years I spent in public service.

Then I have 4-digit and 6-digit incomes in my base (on top of the zeroes, since I don't quite have 40 years of something on top of the income that contributed to the state retirement plan.) So there is the question of whether I ought to add a few more non-zero years before retiring.

[SWBTATTReg]

25. Too bad that she doesn't have a close friend or such that can tell her of the pitfalls of not

getting benefits as early as possible, that is, they died, too early to get any benefits.

A recent friend of mine just passed, and who never got a dime in SS benefits after paying for so many years.

I tried encouraging him to enjoy life, travel, etc. a little bit before it was too late (before health issues, etc., kick in, we all know the score when you're up in age). A heart attack. A real shame. You just never know.

[LittleGirl]

45. Yup, my brother died 6 months after

His job was eliminated. I begged him to visit but he was saving his vacation time for after he was let go. He didn’t visit and I got the worst call of my life when he died of heart failure. He wasn’t eligible as he was 57 when he passed.

[llmart]

95. My neighbor died a month after he turned full retirement age.

He worked his ass off his entire life, many times doing two jobs, one full time and another part time, and he never saw a penny of his SS.

By the way, family history isn't always the best indicator of how long we'll live.

[Tomconroy]

26. I just don't read about a lot of people complaining

That they took social security too soon.

[Freddie]

27. I did a spreadsheet

Yes you have to live into your 80s for things to catch up - making more per month vs. all the $$ you lose by not collecting during those years.
I started collecting at 63 although we don’t need the money to eat, I’m applying that $ to pay on the principal of our mortgage. If we can pay it off in 5 years we save over $20000 in interest, plus peace of mind not having a mortgage payment every month.

[Sogo]

28. It depends upon your health and individual circumstances.

I waited until I was 70, and it was the best decision for me.

[appleannie1]

29. My dad got one SS payment before he died.

[XanaDUer2]

48. that's so sad

as I mention down thread my mom died at 60 from cancer. Her only "retirement" after a lifetime of working, knowing she had less than a year to live. She got emergency ssdi. She spent her last year in terror.

[appleannie1]

53. That took my dad too. It was before Hospice and was horrible. He grinned when he saw the SS check.

We had to mail the second one back.

[niyad]

30. And there is always the ongoingthreat by the pukes to eliminate SS if they get the chance.

As well as the escalating craziness in our world.

[MurrayDelph]

107. This was why I started collecting at 64.5

I was afraid of Republicans moving (or removing) the goalposts before I turned 66 (they'd already moved it from 65), so I signed up to be grandfathered in.

My wife turns 65 in six weeks. Once her Medicare is established, we'll sign her up for SS. (Making sure the Medicare is properly working was a higher priority).

[Dial H For Hero]

33. Excellent advice. I retired from the Post Office at 56, and get a "Special Supplement" that

is roughly the equivalent of Social Security until I reach age 62, at which point I'll get Social Security itself instead.

[Johnny2X2X]

35. Than you for this thread

I too have someone I know who is 67 and gets her heat or electric shut off for not having the money to pay it several times a year every year. They're in poor health and holding out on social security until they can max out. They can't afford groceries some months even though they work full time. I cannot get through to them, collect now, it will take many years to make up this money you're bypassing. So frustrating, the money you are passing up now, you will likely not makeup with an extra $2000 or whatever a year waiting to max out.

[TxGuitar]

110. My wife retired at 64 and 9 months

And started drawing at 65 and 6 mo, 10 months early. The math worked out better to start now rather than wait.

[Johnny2X2X]

122. I wish more people would sit down and do the math

But it's hard at that time of life for people to confront their mortality. You have to accept that you might die soon to get the math correct.

In one example, say you get $2000 a month if you retire 2 year before your standard retirement age. That's 24 months time $2K means you got an extra $48K. The benefit would have been $2300 if they had waited the 2 years. So they're making up $3600 a year, it would take 13.3 years to make up the $48,000 they collected early. https://www.ssa.gov/oact/quickcalc/early_late.html

Now this is where it gets difficult, people have to estimate their average remaining life span, there are tools to help with that. Many people will not live to 80, so that math is clear.

And also, people do not understand the Time Value of money, that money now is worth more than money delayed both in terms of purchasing power and earning potential.

And a factor most people need to think about too is their 401Ks and IRAs or pensions. They'll keep growing if you don't have to spend them as quickly because you're using your social security to pay more of our bills.

The instinct is to delay social security to maximize it, but it's not the right decision for most. Seek a professional for advice. I can tell you that the social security administrators want you to delay it so ssi is more solvent.

[KentuckyWoman]

36. Agree and I will add ...

I have a nephew that had a disabling heart attack at 62. By the time he was denied SSDI he was eligible for reduced social security. He took it. He died at 67. In his case a little less coming in was better than spending the time he had fighting with SSDI until he was eligible for full SS at 65.

I believe some in their 50's have to wait until 66 or 67. I agree with your advise. Take the money. Very few people benefit by waiting. Those with a family history of living long and in very good health at 65 can wait. Then the math works out ...

[Auggie]

37. It's an extra $690 a month for me to wait until 70 ...

that's significant.

[Tbear]

117. How old are you now?

How much would you be collecting if you filed now?
Multiply that number by the number of months you have to wait until age 70.
I bet you will be surprised at the “opportunity cost” of waiting until 70 and how long it will take you to make that up.
Let us know.

[MineralMan]

130. Well-stated.

For some people who have a high annual income, the SS payments can kick them up a tax bracket, so there's that to consider, but only for that group.

Once you reach full retirement age, you can earn as much as you wish. It's just that part of the SS benefits could become taxable. That's something to discuss with a tax person or accountant. Then, you still have to do the math, and consider what you think your life expectancy truly is.

For many, it's a simple equation. For others, it's a little more complicated. I used a relative as an example in my OP, not someone making $50-75K a year. There is absolutely no benefit to her for waiting. She has no income and is unemployable. Why would she not start collecting benefits? It makes absolutely no sense, especially she's at full retirement age. She will not live long enough for the equation to tip the other way. She might not like to think about that, but the additional money in the bank each month would help her right now. Foolish.

[Ferrets are Cool]

38. I agree 100%

[NNadir]

39. I'll add this advice to the advice...

...you gave me about how irresponsible it was of me to have children.

We have screwed over future generations to the max, and speaking only for myself, I'll take when I need to take and not before.

If I die without getting a dime of SS, having contributed to it for a lifetime, this will be my gift to people who need it if I don't end up needing it.

[Tbear]

118. Free Country, but the repukes that want to cancel

“Social Entitlements” thank you for your gift.
Your logic makes no sense to me.
Why not take it and donate it to a worthy cause?

[Tree Lady]

41. My husband had a good retirement so I

Took it early at 62 and we use my money for travel or savings, we don't live off it at all for necessities.

I figured out how many years it would take if I waited and it just wasn't worth it. Now we are 65 & 72 and have money to rent a Airbnb on coast every summer, go out to eat few times a month and visit our kids without worrying about budget.

[XanaDUer2]

42. ABSOLUTELY

My mom always said you can get more money, not more time.

After working her whole life, she got cancer at 60 and one year of ssdi. Never got a retirement, minus one year of knowing she'd die soon.

Personally, I'm out of work hoping to get ssdi for chronic illness at 56.

[Ingersollman]

47. I

don't qualify for full SS retirement until I reach 67. I am planning on taking mine at 65. Lose a little monthly, but like Mineral Man said: "You never know when your time will run out."

[bahboo]

49. yep...soon to be 68 here...

and my tax lady convinced me to take the money. To me, it's better to have the money than to gamble on an extra $400 or $500 a month. We'll probably invest it in something safe, since we don't really need it. Wife and I are still working...

[DinahMoeHum]

50. Next August, I reach the full SS retirement age. . .

. . .66 years, 4 months.

And you can bet your ass I'm taking it then. I'm entitled to it, and G*d help anybody, especially a politician, who tries to take it from me - crack goes their neck.

[Beausoleil]

51. I just figured this out

Still employed but I became eligible for full SS this past May and just got my second payment.

I calculated how much money I would be passing up that I could have between now and 72 and decided I'd rather not wait until I'm 86 or whatever before I've made that much back from the "maximum" benefit.

I can use that money now and won't need it later (I'll put off drawing from my 401k instead).

I realized that I can sell a couple of pieces of property, pay off my mortgage and then retire, hopefully by the end of the year.

Wife has been retired and drawing SS since 62.

[choie]

52. MineralMan has your relative looked

into applying for the Medicare Saving Program? If she’s under a certain income, she may be eligible to have the Medicare Part B premium waived.

[brooklynite]

54. I really don't like "everyone should do THIS" assertions...

...especially when it comes to money. Everyone's situation is different. If you need the money now, evaluate the option and make an informed decision as to which strategy is right for you. There is no absolute strategy applicable in all cases.

[pnwmom]

56. No one has mentioned the very elderly. It is true that you'll get more money

if you hold out till age 70 AND you live past the break-even age. However, the longer you live, the more likely you'll end up in a nursing home.

And most people in long term nursing home care are on Medicaid, having depleted their savings in their first year. After that, it doesn't matter what your Social Security payment is, because it will ALL be going to the nursing home. Medicaid will make up the rest of the cost.

[Native]

62. Hopefully in home care will become the norm. We seem to be moving in that direction.

[pnwmom]

63. Even that is too costly for many to pay for without Medicaid help.

And that means that the amount of a person's Social Security benefit isn't important -- it will all be going to pay for your care, with the balance paid by Medicaid.

[MineralMan]

66. Once in-home care becomes 24/7, it is more expensive

than a nursing home. My mother had it. Very, very costly.

The other thing is that most in-home care is provided by CNA's, with an RN stopping by once a week. The quality of care varies with the person giving it, I and my parents learned. They're not all wonderfully qualified.

My father finally got to the point where he needed 24/7 care, too. He died three days later in the hospital, after catching COVID-19 from the caregiver assigned to him by the home care agency. The caregiver recovered. My father did not, because he was 96 years old and very frail at that point. My mother died the same day at home, under hospice care.

There are plusses and minuses for everything, it seems. My parents had assets that locked them out of Medicaid, so it was all out of pocket for them. Their county had a program, but it still cost as much as nursing home care.

[Retired Engineer Bob]

96. Similar to my dad

Assets to high for Medicaid. The memory care home where he was at insisted that he also had 24/7 nursing in addition to the nursing they provided. Mom was shelling out considerably more than $20,000/month. She paid lawyers a lot of money to have the assets they had separated so only his were being drawn down. He passed in December 2019, the entire estate went into probate. Again lawyers were paid to resolve. It looks like the estate will clear probate later this year.

[MineralMan]

101. Probate is for lawyers. They love it!

I told the attorney who handled my parents' estate that I would have none of that crap. I did a lot of his work myself and bypassed much of the legal hassles, but all legally. His total billings came only to about $7000. All for things I couldn't do. I even found an obscure pleading he used to add their bank assets to the family trust. We finished the entire thing in just over six months. He offered me a job doing research and expediting processes. I said, no, thanks.

We're friends now.

[Retired Engineer Bob]

102. He offered me a job doing research and expediting processes. I said, no, thanks

LOL, can’t blame you a bit.

[MineralMan]

125. When I first contacted him about handling the process,

it was because he had created the trust and will for my parents. I knew nothing about him as an attorney. He was skeptical that we'd be able to settle everything within six months or so. I explained that I wanted to help with the process and that I was pretty good at expediting things that involved bureaucracies. Still skeptical.

That ended when the funeral home that handled my parent's burial arrangements made a serious error on my mother's death certificate form. I didn't learn about the error until about three days before the burial was supposed to take place. I had not received any death certificates for far too long, and they were needed at almost every phase of the process.

I got on the phone and talked to the funeral home, the county recorder's office, the physician who was supposed to have signed the documents for my mother, but who had not. By the end of that day, copies of the death certificate were hand-delivered to the attorney by the funeral director himself, who had dropped the ball.

"How the Hell did you do that," the attorney asked me. I told him that I had told him that I was good at dealing with bureaucracies. "I guess so," the lawyer said. From that time on, he let me handle a lot of things he would otherwise have had to do. It cut deeply into his billable hours, but he went along with me, because I was saving him time and simplifying his job.

The cap on that help came when I searched for and found an obscure precedent case that led to a filing that got my parents' bank accounts put into the trust, avoiding probate. My father had neglected to do that, even though the accounts were identified in the trust documents. The attorney filed a pleading based on that precedent and the probate judge signed the order, which saved tons of time and money. The judge even praised the attorney for "a perfect filing."

That's when he made the job offer.

[NBachers]

58. Still working at 72; I waited 'till 70, & am happy I did. I just like the bigger chunk of money each

month. I borrowed a lot from my 401k last year for a complete Beverly Hills teeth job, so I’m hoping I live long enough to pay myself back.

[dflprincess]

142. Im 68 and plan to wait until 70 to apply.

Im still working and in good health and, like you, would like the bigger check. My 401K currently looks good but I don't really trust it.

Not sure how long I'll keep working. I'm in the odd position where my employer's health & dental costs me less thsn Medicare B will & it covers more.

I figure if I die before I collect, I probably won't care.

[IcyPeas]

59. interesting thread and discussion. it's something to think about.

[rustysgurl]

60. My bro-in-law died at 68

He made a very good income while working as a computer programmer for years. He died this year at age 68. The Social Security letters we found in his records showed that he would receive almost $3,000 a month if he took his retirement immediately -- a little more at age 70. He chose to wait, believing he would live as long as his father did (age 93). A heart attack in his sleep settled that. He never married and had no children. All that money went into the pool without him ever receiving a dime.

When my husband (his brother) retired, we did the math. Waiting until age 70 was not worth it, when you consider all the months of income he would receive between 66 and 70. It was a no brainer for us.

[Marcus Pullarius]

69. There is also the broader view.

That is, the sooner we retire and not try to claw every nickel out of ss, the sooner the new workers can get a job or a promotion. Of course I say this in retrospect, having retired several years ago. But it seems to me that in the long view the most important thing we can do for the generations we have spawned is to get out of the way (in the work force) so the whole society can advance.

[halfulglas]

70. Excellent advice to her.

I never intended to work until the max but a divorce and expenses destroyed my savings. But I was earning a decent (not great salary) to replenish my 401K so that I'm not living entirely on my Social Security even though I don't make enough from my investment to pay any taxes on them.

But I learned a lesson from my first landlords we had when first married. They had a lovely well built and maintained 4 unit apartment building in which they lived in one and he continued his job working for an insurance company while she handled most of the tasks of handling the building. They were full of plans of what they were going to do when he retired. They were finally going to travel to Europe and see places they always dreamed of with no money worries. Well, in the first year of his retirement he had a stroke and passed. The wife had many regrets that they never got to do the things together they had put off.

[MineralMan]

71. It's important to assess your own health, too.

That's the issue with my relative. She is in very poor health, but is also in full-scale denial of that. She resists seeing a doctor, because she fears what the doctor will tell her. She won't go on Social Security because she will lose money. She simply doesn't get it.

[hotrod0808]

73. I don't plan on ever retiring

because I can't live on Social Security alone. I will file for benefits when I am 67, but know that I can't make it on that. It still 20 years away for me.

[Native]

74. Married couples also need to consider what their SS benefit will be if one passes.

Sometimes it makes sense for the spouse with the higher benefit to delay. Upon their death, the surviving spouse with the lower benefit will start to receive the deceased spouse's benefit amount in lieu of their lower benefit amount. It's surprising how many people never consider how their lives might change with one less check.

[NellieStarbuck]

75. MY father died at 61.

He did not live long enough to collect a penny of his SS. So, I took mine the moment I was eligible.

[MineralMan]

77. I'm so sorry to read that. Too many of us believe we will

live longer that we actually will. If COVID-19 taught us nothing else, it should have taught us that life is fleeting.

Optimism is a wonderful thing, but it can betray you in an instant.

[MLAA]

76. I'm planning to collect at 62 in a little over a year.

I have little confidence in the longevity to the planet due to our poor stewardship.

[MineralMan]

78. There is that, too.

[Grasswire2]

79. She might qualify for the Medicaid program that pays the Medicare premium.

QMB. Qualified Medicare Beneficiary.

Basically ALL her medical expenses would be covered, then. That might be worth as much as the addl SS, in the long run as she's aging.

[extvbroadcaster]

80. I ran the numbers

I took mine at 62 and 8 months. I ran all the numbers. Break even was 79, or as long as 82 with the time value of money. Both my parents passed away at 85. I have already known people that are gone and never collected dime one. So I have no regrets about filing and getting my money now.

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

82. My husband was laid off at 68.

He immediately retired. He is seven years older than I am. He is English and we had always planned to move to England for retirement. I was laid off at 61. I immediately applied for a U.K. spousal visa. This was in February. I would turn 62 in July. We sold our house, and my husband moved to England in late March figuring my visa would come through soon and I’d follow. My visa didn’t come through until June. I applied for SS 3 months before my 62nd birthday. We have been here 4 years and loving our life. We live in a small, very charming town. I was never going to wait until I reached full retirement age, because we wanted to spend time together while we were still healthy.

[George II]

84. When I was approaching retirement age, I put together a spreadsheet calculating the payment...

...at retirement ages from early (I think it was 62?) through maximum at 70 years.

My calculations showed that the breakeven, i.e., I would be "losing" benefits if I retired at 65 vs. 70, was 80.5 years old. Which would mean I was "gambling" that I would reach that age.

I retired at 65. In fact, I saved up vacation time and I stopped working three weeks before 65, and officially retired a day after reaching 65.

A friend of mine, a few months younger than me, insisted on working until he was 70 so he'd get the maximum. AND HE IS A FREAKING MILLIONAIRE!!!!

I tried and tried to explain it to him, but he was not budging from that.

[GoneOffShore]

85. I started pulling SocSec at 62. Never looked back(didn't want to turn into a pillar of salt).

Mrs GoS will start in December at 62. No point in waiting.

[BlueKentuckyGirl]

86. Simple math can help

When I was trying to decide whether to start SS payments at 66 or wait until 72, I sat down and made 2 columns on a piece of paper. Into the first column, I listed what my yearly cumulative income would be and continued every year until I got to 72. Then I started a second column and started listing my cumulative income at the higher rate. I continued adding the yearly amounts per column. What I found was that it would take me about 12 years to even meet the amount that I would have gotten had I started at the lower rate at 66 years of age. Since longevity really doesn't run in my family, I decided to start getting income at 66. I guess if you think you are going to live a long time, it may pay off to wait, but I don't think most people will live long enough to benefit much by waiting.

[DFW]

87. I don't even know what the rules are

Can you collect if you are still working full time (I am)?

What taxes are due (and where) on what I would collect, keeping in mind that I am an American citizen living in Germany?

The amount I would collect (I don't even know exactly how much that is--I get a thing from the Government every year, which I usually ignore, which I probably shouldn't) stops increasing at some point. If I decide to start collecting, does my work status matter how much I get if I'm age 70 or older?

I don't know whether it's worth the effort. If there's a thousand or two free and clear every month after taxes, I guess there's a planned parenthood chapter somewhere that could always use the money.

[NBachers]

111. As a still-working 72 year old, I can tell you that you can collect and keep working. I'm having 7%

held out for taxes. Social Security holds it for me, and the IRS incorporates it into their figures, but it doesn't cover all I owe. I waited 'till 70, just because I'm financially unsophisticated and liked the idea of more money every month. You'll get your full SS payment, on top of whatever you make at work. Since I'm now making my peak income, I'm curious if that figures into the years they total up to determine what I receive. I think, maybe so, but nobody's actually told me so. On edit: Yes, they calculate this into my highest-earning years, and will increase my payments accordingly.

The Social Security website is pretty informative, and I've found the SS staff, both in person and through phone calls, quite professional and informative. If you establish yourself with an account, it's easy to see what your figures will be. They're closed during certain times late at night, and my West Coast location makes that an issue for access sometimes, but I can get there during reasonable hours.

As far as the "living in Germany" wild card goes, that's beyond my limited ability to know. You've really got to start an account with Social Security, and establish rapport with someone who can lay it all out for you. It's actually quite doable.

Do It!

https://www.ssa.gov/

https://www.aarp.org/retirement/social-security/

https://www.aarp.org/retirement/social-security/questions-answers/working-while-collecting-social-security/

https://www.aarp.org/retirement/social-security/questions-answers/social-security-payment-increase-working/

[DFW]

112. Ok, thanks for the advice

I’ll call down there one of these fine days before I head back to dEUtschland.

[NBachers]

113. Check out my edited links.

[nitpicker]

90. From the world of the federal workforce

I probably am one of the first "pure" FERS retirees. I wasn't able to get a permanent Federal job at the height of Reagan's "shrink government", so by the time I managed to get a real one FERS soon came along and those without enough service under the old system
(which was much more beneficial) were forced into the new one.

FERS allows for retirement at age 56 with 30+ years of service, so I did that, but the system only pays the FERS supplemental until age 62. It's designed to encourage people to ((retire and then)) take SS early, so I did so and got a "pay raise".

[BumRushDaShow]

139. I started right before they passed the law to update the retirement system and make it retroactive

and none of the personnel staff on-boarding me had any idea what FERS was (it wasn't final at the time), let alone had any forms or details about it.

It wasn't until several years later when various regional personnel staff were doing FERS/CSRS "road shows" to promote an "open season" for people on CSRS to choose to switch to FERS, which I wasn't about to do.

So for the first 20 years of my working career, I was under full CSRS... until additional legislation was eventually passed (I think around the mid 2000s) to handle what they called "the error group", this time with the option to pick either FERS or CSRS offset. I obviously chose the latter. They then proceeded to transfer most of the money that had been withheld from my pay for CSRS, and moved it to SS to count as quarters (and mailed me a huge stack of "revised" payslips to reflect that).

I retired at 55 and have been getting CSRS payments every month since, but have to now apply for SS at 62 because my CSRS check amount will suddenly be reduced when I hit 62, and will then become the supplement to SS (but with the total monthly amount the same as if I were still getting full CSRS). So that day will come in just under 3 years for me. Will need to apply for SS at least 3 months before.

[Evolve Dammit]

93. Good thread MM. It helps hear what the differnet experiences are. Thanks

[Retired Engineer Bob]

98. I have a question

I retired at 57. Still working part time, but income will be going down considerably. If SS payments are based on the average of the last X years, is there an advantage to taking SS at 62 as opposed to later to keep the average income higher?

I need to see a fiduciary financial advisor, and an estate planning lawyer as well.

[nitpicker]

103. It's your "highest" 35 years

https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10070.pdf

They take your annual earnings covered by SS withholding, adjust it over time, then take your 35 best years once adjusted to have an average and then calculate your SS payment.

So if you are having a significant reduction in income subject to SS withholding, your "35 best years" might be behind you. In that case, it would not matter WHEN you started withdrawing SS; it would be the same 35 best years, with the crossover point between taking it early, at full retirement age, or age 70 supposedly being age 81 or so ((earlier, I had heard age 78)).

But DO talk to the pros: this is NOT my area of expertise.

[nitpicker]

104. This assumes you won't go back to well-paid full time work

Again, talk to the pros.

[Retired Engineer Bob]

105. Appreciate your responses

Gives me ideas to discuss with an advisor.

[Backseat Driver]

106. We were forced into early age SS by Republicans - don't get me started on

GOP policies of deregulation that closed opportunity, obstruction of assistance to the least among our citizenry and newcomers, corporate greed that closed union worker protections and stagnated wages, and the escalation of street warfare, healthcare, and tuition costs since the 80s...just don't!

"What did YOU do wrong, those war-traumatized and/or early-orphaned by diseases for which there were no antibiotics or surgical techniques, those parents asked? Well, some got what those violent MAGATs now say, "They prayed their suffering away" Some, "They've raised Christian soldiers with the blood of Jesus is in their veins" while pouring their disposable $$ into mega- and micro-churches political scams; some willingly choose merciful denial so to go home before their time after swallowing the misinformation of the media; some never changed to meet the demands to have saving "investments." Some made their kids responsible for their ignorance.

[OnionPatch]

114. I'm 62 and taking mine now.

My husband died of cancer last year before having ever spent a single day in retirement. I’m not going to
chance that happening to me.

[twodogsbarking]

116. Age is only one consideration. You should also consider other income

and how it will affect the taxation of SS. Drawing from 401ks or IRAs should be planned to minimize tax. Do the research using your own data and circumstances. You can consult with experts but you really need to know for yourself to make good decisions. Many people make the wrong decisions by listening to the wrong advice.
Lifelong accountant and CPA.

[Norbert]

120. Still working and intend on doing so a couple more years.

I want to max out on SS (70). There were debts accrued in the past and had to dip into the retirement years ago to pay them off and are fixing the house up which is why I continue to work.

I am in very good health for my age and was thinking about working a bit longer and double dipping for a while with SS and a paycheck but I will cross that bridge when I come to it.

Right now I plan on crossing the finish line with my current company but new managers in our department started mucking things up. They are bringing in 'their' people and moving us out to other departments which I guess beats being unemployed. Most seems to be over 60 that are being moved. It seems like ageism to me. I may seek the advise of an attorney. It would be, at least, worth the consultation fee to see if I have any options.

[The Jungle 1]

121. If you are sick COLLECT your money from SS. The race is over.

[Generic Other]

123. I read somewhere half of Americans go out at 62

Many fear they will not get any benefits if they do not retire. Now that is the fault of catfood commissions, years of the GQP sabotage, and Trump the crook. They hijacked the lockbox where our money was supposed to be safely growing interest. Our side tried to compromise when we needed to stand our ground.

Sad that we have to fight to protect it every new admin. Thank Biden for the temporary feeling that checks are not going to be halted for those who earned the benefit.

[TexasBushwhacker]

124. Not to mention, if Congress and the President don't get their rear in gear

And make MORE wages subject to Social Security taxes, you have to question how much will be available to pay your increased benefit if you wait until age 70.

I'm 64.5 and had just gotten laid off for the second time in 3 years when I turned 62, so I really didn't have a choice. But my mother died of breast cancer at age 69 and my dad died of complications following a stroke when he was 75. I might make it to 82, but I doubt it. I've been working full time now for 2 years, so I just invest my SSN (and more) and max out my IRA contributions, which offsets the tax I owe on my SSN.

[mnhtnbb]

126. I ran the numbers and decided to start collecting at 62.

My husband was almost 9 years older than I am and we didn't need his SS to push us into a higher tax bracket, so he waited to collect and then he could easily cut back his part time practice hours.

[TexasBushwhacker]

133. Yeah, I'm lucky

I was a science teacher for 9 years, but switched to bookkeeping over 20 years ago. Now I'm getting certified as an enrolled agent so that I can prepare taxes. I will always be able to find good paying part time work when I'm ready.

[Chautauquas]

131. I paid into it for a lot of years and took it at 62

I know many would advise against taking it early, but with my pension and SS I'm doing just fine.

[BobTheSubgenius]

134. A lot of financial advisors even recommend taking it early...as soon as you qualify.

I don't know what the "magic number" is in the US, but in Canada, you "break even" between 80 and 82 years old. That is, you will have recovered all the money you put in through payroll deduction. Here, the "penalty" for claiming early and the "bonus" for waiting is the same: .5% per month, to a maximum of +/- 30%.

In cases such as that of your relative, as you say, she needs to enrol yesterday.

[hot2na]

136. Im 64 and 10 months

I am working with a financial advisor and her recommendation is for me to take SS at 69, however, I'm going to start to take it at 65 and 6 months. I have other sources of income (Annuity, Stocks, 401K, Real Estate), that would allow me to wait but I have a hang up about letting the SS sit there, even though I can afford to let it sit.

[madville]

137. For me it will all depend on income/employment

If I'm working, making good money and still enjoying that then I'll wait to draw SS. If my health isn't great and I'm not working for some reason, I'll take it as soon as possible.

My parents waited until 70 to draw theirs' since they were in good health and still fully employed in long term careers. I was surprised it was $5300 a month combined, much less than they made working but a nice chunk for a retirement budget.

[MacKasey]

141. At her age she should have hit 100% at 66

I took it at 65 1/2 got 96% and continue to work part time

Very happy

[Texin]

143. I took SS at 62. I could have waited the 3 extra years, but the benefit of doing

so is negligible. I'm married and my spouse is still working. He's a CPA in his own practice and as long as he's working he'll keep contributing to the SS retirement benefits, which will continue to grow. I tell people who are working in minimum wage jobs to take the retirement benefits as early as they are available. People who are on the margins and who are not in great health need to avail themselves to their benefits sooner than later. And it's not like a person has to quit a part-time job (or a full time one for that matter) to take the benefits. You're allowed to work as much as you want/need and still draw the SS benefits.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

144. When to start SS needs to be a highly individual decision.

Taking it as early as possible is the right decision for some people. Delaying all the way to age 70 is right for others.

There are several things to be very aware of. First of all, most of us are going to live longer than we realize. Often a lot longer.

Focusing entirely on the supposed "break-even" date is not always a good idea.

Also, the money you pay into SS when working is NOT put into an account for you. It's used to pay the current people getting SS. And when you collect, that money comes from the current workers.

I'd strongly recommend reading Get What's Yours by Laurence Kotlikoff, Paul Solman, and Philip Moeller. Make sure you get the revised edition which accounts for significant changes that were made in 2016. It helped me enormously when I was getting ready to file for SS.