On Social Security benefits..if you were 62 and were underemployed

[Honeycombe8]

19. Yes.

That's because I've read that if you start receiving benefits at 62, you are more likely to RECEIVE MORE MONEY IN THE LONGRUN than waiting to get the full benefits.

If you don't need the $ at 62...great. Put it in a savings account to get the most interest you can, or put it in a conservative allocation mutual fund, and make it grow until you need it. Then you can add THAT money to the bigger benefits you start receiving a few years later.

The govt wants you to wait to get full benefits. Why? It's because that saves the govt money. That means it costs the recipients money and they get less in the long run.

There is a break even point...where the $ of benefits you receive starting at age 62, breaks even with the amount of $ yu'd receive if you start receiving larger benefits later. My dad is 80. Several years ago he hit the break even point, he said. He said it regretfully, as if he wished he had waited to get bigger benefits. But think of all the years he had been rfeceiving benefits! If he'd put that in an account to grow (and he could have, I think - or at least some of it), he would've hit the breakeven point later. Something like that.

I plan on receiving benefits at age 62,unless I'm still working full time, so the taxes taken out of SS would be too big a hit for me. I'm 58. I'll have to see what my situation is at that time. But if you're underemployed and are in a low tax bracket, you may not get hit too hard on the taxes taken out of your Social Security.