[Jenny]

I see a lot of discussion about whether it’s best to take SS at 62 or wait until 70.

My husband will be retiring in 2 years at 62 and plans to take SS at that time.

I plan to work 4 more years and retire at 60. My husband’s parents both passed away in their 60s.

My parents both lived into their 90s.

The way I see it is if I take SS at 62, I won’t be taking as much from my investments so they will continue to grow and I may withdraw 3% rather than 4%.

Even though I may live to 100, isn’t it better to take SS at 62 and withdraw less from investments?

Also, my husband and I have averaged similar income levels over the years, though I make more now, the surviving spouse would take the larger of either their own SS or 50% of their spouse’s SS so either of us would not be looking to the other spouses SS.

Just making sure I’m thinking about this correctly.

[Bill]

You’ve got the survivor benefit wrong. Once one person passes, the survivor gets the higher of the 2 benefits.

For most couples, it’s usually best for the higher earner to claim at 70 and the lower at 62.

[Stephen]

I’m 10 years older than my wife. She’s a stay-at-home mom but does have enough credits to have Social Security.

I plan on waiting till 70. Women tend to live longer.

Me waiting until 70 could give her 2 decades better income.

[Jessica]

If you plan to use ACA healthcare, you benefit from a lower taxable income (lower premiums and better coverage if you choose a Silver plan).

SS is taxable, do you have non-taxable funds you can dip into while using ACA healthcare?

If so, run the numbers to see what income serves you best for that.

If you happen to live in IL, I can help you with this.

In cases where you can create a lower taxable income (with the lifestyle you planned for in retirement), and you use ACA, you may be better off to wait until the calendar year after the younger spouse turns 65 to take SS.

[Leslie]

Both of my parents passed away right before retirement after working their whole lives and paying in and never seen a penny of S.S.

I told myself I wasn’t going to let that happen to me or my husband.

We both retired early and enjoy life.

[Betty]

No one mentioned if they are still working. If so, don’t u give up a lot of Ss if u collect at 62 and still working?

[Lynn]

My husband and I retired at 58, started drawing at 62. You are drawing less from savings.

We basically live on the SS.

Take your amount that you get from 62-70.

That money would be invested.

If you wait, it takes a long time to even catch up to what you would’ve already had.

And you might die sooner and it’s all gone, not even to your heirs.

[Anna]

It all comes down to math… assume he lives till 80, then the math becomes:

Option 1: 18 (years) x12 (months per year) x $(however much his monthly SS payment is) =$Total SS Payout

Option 2: (10 years) x 12 x $(monthly SS payment) = $Total SS Payout.

Now compare both numbers and see where you get more money out of his SS.

Hope this makes sense.

Getting more per month doesn’t necessarily equates to making more over time.

[Betsy]

I took mine at 62 and when my husband became 62 we went to SS and she said take now.

You never know what tomorrow will bring.

She was right he passed in his sleep at 63.

[Tina]

I feel like it’s a use it or lose it situation. Since no one really knows when they will die, I’m taking it as soon as possible.

I also expect my expenses to be less in my later years, so the reduced benefit isn’t a huge concern.

[Jane]

I’m FIREd and 59 yrs old at a 2% withdrawal rate, partnered long term but not legally married, and with separate finances.

Our SS benefit at 62 is almost identical anyway.

My current plan is to claim at 62.

My benefit coincidentally matches my typical annual expenses, so my savings would be there for larger expenses and whatever travel I want to do.

If the market is way up when I hit 62, I may postpone for a year or two.

I did a worksheet at one point, and it convinced me that the SS timing won’t really matter much….

I will probably die with plenty of money left over.

[Christi]

My mother recently died, completely unexpectedly, at 68. Her sister died a few years before, completely unexpectedly, at 64.

And decades earlier, their mother died, completely unexpectedly, at 49.

Yeah… I’ll be taking that social security the moment I’m eligible.

Almost forgot that during that time my husband was diagnosed with leukemia.

Tomorrow is never, ever promised, no matter how much we think it is.

[Joel]

You are correct – it doesn’t sound like either of you would claim on the other’s record, at least not before the other passes.

Given that your husband may pass before you, you might want to consider strategies around that, but it doesn’t sound very material.

If there is longevity in your family, I would seriously consider delaying your Social Security until age 70.

After your FRA, your Social Security benefits increase by 0.667% per month you delay.

*Plus* they receive a COLA adjustment every year! By delaying the full 3 years (from 67 to 70) you get an increase of 24% plus the associated inflation adjustments to all of your subsequent benefit checks.

Inflation adjustments could easily increase the absolute dollars received by another 3%/year making the total increase more like 33% in absolute dollars once you begin at age 70.

What’s more, our cognitive abilities decline in old age.

Having all that money coming in from Social Security makes for pretty cheap longevity and senility insurance.

[Mandy]

I plan to retire at 60 and draw from SS at 70. Mortgage will be paid off at 64.

I will live solely on my investments during those 10 years.

I also will get a pension that I’m planning to push off until 70 which will lead to higher payouts.

Have you read the book Die With Zero?

I figured I’ll have fun with my investment money during the early years and then during the years where I might not play as much I can absolutely more than live on my pension and SS.

Especially as the home will be paid off.

I am single with no children/heirs.

[Al]

I don’t believe there is a “correct” way because of all the uncertainty around lifespan and investment returns, but I claimed early to allow my assets to grow more than if I were spending out of them.

[Karen]

Remember cost of living increases would be smaller, if taken earlier. It is based on a percentage of what you receive.

The later you claim, the higher the benefit and cost of living increases would be a higher amount.

[Keith]

I took SS early. My reason was my Dad, his brothers and his dad did not live to age 60.

I only have one cousin who lived past age 60.

What I now have is a large IRA which with which I will have to start RMD’s from in 2 years at age 73.

I now have to watch my annual earnings and withdrawals from my IRA to avoid IRMAA.

I can’t say I reget taking SS early as family history said I probably would not be here now.

If you do take SS early, consider converting at least some of your IRA if you have one to a Roth before you start medicare to avoid IRMAA.

I expect my medicare cost to triple over the next few years due to my RMD’s.

In hindsight, I should have converted much larger amounts to my Roth before I turned 65 and paid the income tax at that time on the conversions.

Now I will still have to pay the income tax on funds coming out of my IRA, but also pay the increased monthly medicare premium.

[Sharon]

Remember SS
has a guaranteed 8% a year increase until 70. That’s hard to beat. It also has a cost of living increase.

I waited till 70 though my husband took his at 62

[Dara]

Taking it early results in a lower pymt so as you get older you’ll be drawing from investments more, which is also at a time your faculties may not be quite as with it and it’s easy to make major investment mistakes.

Where a larger SS monthly pymt you can’t make mistakes with.

That point makes me wonder about waiting til 70.

But then I think taking the pymt at 62 and investing it…

multiply that every ten years (use 172) if it’s 900 a month is about 155k more to leave for heirs where if you wait til 70 but die before or shortly after you paid into it for decades and get nothing.

[Joe]

If you’re thinking about SS as an investment, it leads to all sorts of questions and optimization scenarios but you’re missing the most important input –

how long will you live?

If you think of it as longevity insurance, it tends to narrow your focus and lead to simpler choices.

[Roberta]

Will leaving it in your investment accounts earn you as much as you earn by leaving it in social security?

Supposedly you can earn 8% in SS, after FRA (I think it is).

Some people will argue it’s not exactly 8% etc, no need to go down that road.

The point is you should contact SS learn what the difference would be & make a decision.

And the only reason this is even a consideration, is due to the good genes in your family to the young age into their 90’s.

Same for my husband, for him we will wait until he is 70.

I will take it at 64. – Good Luck!

[Author]

Posts