That’s absolutely a consideration, as I mentioned in my previous post. The decision includes a number of factors, and current and expected health are two major ones, along with how you feel about your job. I wasn’t advising you (or anyone else) to do anything, just pointing out that the monthly payments are based on expected longevity when people start collecting.
My folks are in their early 90’s and are financially set for anything that can and will happen. I expect to still travel/adventure into my 80’s.
My preference would be to work part-time and delay taking SS until 65+. We could live comfortably with only part time income and travelling for a few years.
I’m 48 now. I’ve always said I’d work until I s 70, and I still plan to do so, but little things have been creeping up on me. I don’t get around like I used to, and I’ve noticed little lapses in memory every now and again. I still plan for “full”, but as that line inches closer, that becomes less and less certain.
Looks like no one has mentioned this, so here’s my take.
Consult with a financial advisor, if you can find one who bills “per visit”. This is a surprisingly complex question, and we’d need to know everything from current income, life expectancy, planned retirement income, marital status (and partner’s health/expectancy) to the amounts of investment income (401K, IRA, etc) and how much is tax deferred. All this will need run against expected rates of return and different asset allocations along with expected medical expenses.
Yes, a lot of these are unknowns, including whether the system gets significantly changed, but it surprising how different the graphs are of the various benefit ages. I’m in the same place as the OP, and my FA is recommending waiting till at least 65, or maybe until FRA (66.67). She’s advocating pulling other income streams “forward” and saving SS till the last. To my objections that I might not be “grandfathered” in if changes were made, she answered we could file at any point prior to FRA if changes seem likely.
I took mine at 65 (66?) and that pissed off my financial guy. But I buried a husband when he was 55. He never got squat. I ain’t fooling around. And both my parents were affected by dementia around 70-75. Quit my high stress job, cleaned out the closets at home until I was bored, then got a very very low stress job for almost no money, 3 days a week. Sooooooooooo much happier.
All except the last are valid reasons to take the lower amount earlier. I don’t think cuts in Social Security for people already receiving it and who don’t have lots of other money are a realistic possibility. That’s talked up to get people out to vote against politicians who supposedly would do this but I think the real political feasibility of that is basically zero.
There will have to be increases in taxes and/or reduction in benefit growth for future recipients at some point. The SSA is not making it up when they say in your SS statement that existing taxes and ‘trust fund’ will only pay 70-some% of promised benefits from sometime in the 2030’s (no need to precisely recount it since it’s uncertain anyway). But I think it’s about 0% likely that that eventual change will include benefit cuts to existing recipients relying on SS, and fear of cuts should not factor into a decision to take SS early IMO.
I took my Social Security about 8 months before my full retirement age of 66. I calculated that my “break even point,” where the amount of extra payments I would get would equal my reduction in payments, was around 82. I figured it wasn’t worth waiting on the chance I would “lose” by living longer than that.
The other consideration is that I have continued to work free-lance. You lose part of your benefits depending on how much you make before full retirement age, but there’s a much larger allowance for earnings in the calendar year before you reach full retirement, so I didn’t lose anything there.
You can figure out your personal “break-even age” by comparing the amount of additional payments you’ll receive before 70, compared to the monthly reduction in payments. It’s only worth not taking it if you expect to live past that age (putting aside considerations such as if you continue to work before you reach full retirement age).
You’re in trouble! You have 6 months after you turn 65 to apply for medicare (a & b). Now you’ll have PERMANENT 10% penalty for late filing
I didn’t read all the posts in detail, but I didn’t see this fact which was important to my decision.
The SS system is designed, by law, to have a breakpoint at age 80±1 yr. That is, if you start taking benefits at 62 you will come out ahead up until you reach 80. After that, you will fall behind. How much you lose is a complex question that starts with figuring out how much you get at full retirement age. But the basic fact is that you are ahead until 80, then behind.
So, it is up to you to decide whether you plan to live much past 80 and whether the loss in total income is worth losing out on income at age 62-66. The whole “present value” of income thing comes in to play. I was never able to figure it out and decided to take SS at 62 because you only have to die once to lose but have to continue to live every day to win. It seems like the odds are in my favor.
The spousal benefits must be considered. But she has to keep living every day her(him)self to win that bet as well.
My secondary problem was that all the “advisors” I talked to kept harping on the fact that if I live past 80 I will come out ahead in the long run. True but not the only concern. With retirement several things change suddenly. One is that your financial calculations go from an essentially infinite time period to suddenly a finite time period. At least it did for me. While working I didn’t worry about the details of my retirement-I just saved as much as I could. Now that I am retired, I suddenly have to factor in a finite (but still unknown) time span. It makes a difference that financial advisors gloss over-infinite is certainly easier. But not realistic.
Maybe changing jobs, while the economy is still good, could be an option? I know it is tough for us older people, but it could be something to explore.
I’m waiting until 70 to take mine, though I’m getting spousal benefits from my wife’s, which I started at 66, but you are too young to do that hack. Benefits go up 8% a year. You didn’t say what kind of investments you have, beside your home, but you should think if they are going to have that kind of return.
I worked until I was about 64 1/2, 6 months longer than I expected to, and that helped a lot also. Especially in terms of health insurance. I had COBRA for the period before I hit 65, but it was expensive.
But if you have some reason to think you won’t live until 80, taking it now makes sense.
The most useful thing I got from my financial advisor was a Monte Carlo simulation of how much money I’d have at various ages under various models of market growth, inflation, and how much I expected to spend. Unlike the fairly useless retirement income calculators you find online, this gave, for each year, balances, and the probability of having them - for instance, a 90% probability of having $X, a 50% probability of having $X+Y, and a 10% probability of having $X+Y+Z. If you have an 80% probability of having lots of money left at 90, that is reasonably close to infinite.
As time goes on you can track your progress against this chart, and see if you are comfortable.
If I were you, I’d start taking it at 62. If your job’s that hard on you, and you can get by on social security and whatever else you and your partner have coming, save yourself and GTFO of there.
I’m doing exactly the opposite (holding off until 70, most likely), but then I’ve got a very different set of circumstances.
Will they muck up Social Security? Short answer: not possible for another 15 years, and even then it’s extremely unlikely.
Long answer: the Social Security trust fund won’t be exhausted until 2034, is what the actuaries say. And even now, most of the money paid out in benefits comes from current Social Security taxes: with no changes in the law, benefits in 2035 would be ~75% of what they would have been if the trust fund were still solvent. But old people vote, so one way or another, that problem will be fixed.
My plan (I’m 3 years younger than you) is to wait until I’m 66 and a half (basically the middle payout for SS), and what I plan to do is front load some of my retirement investment to take the strain until the SS comes on stream and then lower the flow from my investments back to a level that includes SS. I hear you about the job wearing you down…I feel the same. I can retire, based on the current numbers, at 65, which is what I plan to do, but I COULD retire at 62. It would mean more front loading of my retirement investment stream but it’s workable. What it would mean right now is my investment money would last either until my wife and I are 107 or 102, which doesn’t seem likely with either of us, as we aren’t in the best of health. It will REALLY suck if someone comes up with some radical life extension stuff though. 
ETA: as for mucking up the system, I don’t think there is really anything they can do to our payouts at this point. The folks who have to worry are really the younger ones, as I can almost guarantee that, at a minimum the age requirements are going to go up (as they have in the past) and they won’t start to be able to take money out until significantly later in life. But for you (and me)? I don’t think so. Not unless the entire country goes down.
i didn’t fall for the medicare (you have to take it now or else) I’ve save $125 a month for 8 years now. $125 a month is a lot of money and more than makes up for any penalty. If your sick get it … if your not wait.
I even received a letter from the VA saying that I didn’t have to take medicare, because the VA would take care of me (but I notice they sure want it if you have it).
I waited and my ex-wife didn’t (but then she’s a millionaire lol) but the difference in our pay is something like $200 a month for my waiting till 66 and she started at 62.
SS increase is huge this January something like 3% … Welcome to the cut off crowd they won’t hurt the baby boomers, but my fifty year old son might have to wait till he is 70.
By the time you are in your early sixties, you should be able to estimate your longevity better than the average for all people. I agree that you should use that knowledge and your financial need to determine when you should start taking it.
How’s your health compared to that of the average 60 year old? Did your parents and grandparents live to be old, or did they die younger due to things that might be genetic? Do you exercise regularly? Eat healthy? Do/did you smoke?
Those questions are likely more relevant than worries about what might happen to Social Security. Sure, the future is uncertain, but Social Security is very politically popular and the US is wealthier than it’s ever been. Social Security won’t be around forever, but it’s almost certainly going to outlive you
I’m glad someone started this topic, add me to the list of those that are pondering the question.
I’ve had a niche sales/consulting business that I’ve done well at for a long time, but multiple factors are making it hard for me to keep it going, and I’m just getting too old for it and I’m not enjoying it anymore. But the logistics of winding everything down and pulling the trigger on my retirement plans just seem overwhelming.
I plan to move back to NC to be near my family ( and to take advantage of the “free place to live” aspect of having a family home). And the lower cost of living. At this point I’d just be sharing it with my brother, it’s a big place (and a nice place, modern, 3 years old) and he’s an easygoing guy. My family is small, we are kind of eccentric but we are very close and I’m starting to feel they need me.
In addition to SS, I have 4 different investment accounts. I also own an apartment and I’ve accumulated a fair amount of equity, and I expect my home equity to increase substantially if I hang onto it for awhile and rent it out ( Thanks Amazon!). And I should be able to clear a little extra income on the rental. But before I do that I have to go out and get a HELOC and do some renovation on the place ( I’m way too easygoing about maintenance and the kitchen and bath need a complete redo.) Also need to unload 30 years worth of stuff, since Ill be moving into a furnished place.
One of my plans for Christmas is to try to talk to my family’s investment counselor, I’m thinking since they manage my Moms portfolio and my name’s on the accounts I can milk them for some free advice.
With me it’s not so much being able to do it — I know I can— it’s just the logistics. Frankly, I always assumed I would defer applying for SS until 65 at least and live off other income for awhile — but I need to talk to someone about it.
But I’m glad I saw this thread.
Since the collective wisdom pushed by the financial experts is to wait as long as possible, I elected to get mine the split second I was eligible. I haven’t regretted it for a single second.
You should check out the differences between getting benefits at 65 and waiting for the full retirement age of 66. There are some major benefits to waiting beyond the bigger payout.
I used “Get What’s Yours” which covered the hack of putting a spouse on half your benefits and then waiting until 70 to get yours, which no longer works. I used Medicare for Dummies which was good - I assume there is a Social Security for Dummies book too.
I used a site which let you input quite complicated scenarios and situations and told you what the best plan was, but it seems to have vanished. You should look for one.
You’re correct, if you have VA, you’re ok (I’m vet myself); but…if you’re a distance away from VA and need to go to local hospital, then medicare is useful. fyi when SS goes up 3%, medicare cost goes up 1.5% (gov’t gives and takes :-{) I waited until 70 for increased benefit.
I may have missed it, but what’s your health insurance situation?
You can collect Social Security at 62 but Medicare still doesn’t kick in until 65.
Meet with a financial planner if you can to discuss the options.
A friend of mine is talking about retiring at 62. She’s met with a planner and the planner’s basic take is "for most people, I’d say no. For you: you save, and you have a lot of assets put aside. You can manage ". She has no debt aside from her mortgage. She’s also got one or two health concerns that have her considering moving closer to family.
Us: oh hell no. Our minimum age for full SS is 66 and 10 months. We have two special needs kids and destitute elderly parents. We’ll be working as long as we can manage :(.