Posted on 07/10/2018 2:39:24 PM PDT by GeorgiaDawg32
I'm at that age where I'm trying to determine whether or not to take social security a year early or wait until I turn 66. To that end, I called social security and asked them what my benefit will be at 65. They told me. I informed them I'm going to keep working and make far more than the $45k I'm allowed without penalty next year. The social security benefits will go directly to the savings account. I don't need it to live on.
My question was, since I'll get no check for the last 3 months of this year and no check for the first 6 months of next year, do I recover that money at some point?
Answer Number 1) You get it back incrementally on your retirement benefit when you turn 66.
Answer Number 2) It's gone as a penalty and you won't see a penny of it
Answer Number 3) You will get a lump sum check for the amount of the missed benefits when you turn 66
Are any of these answers correct or is there a 4th answer out there?
If you know social security and how it works, I need the help.
Thanks in advance.
And I figured like you did, that it would take years to recoup the foregone money I passed on at an earlier age and maybe impossible to ever catch up.
The government's run the numbers. They offer you a little more per month if you'll "wait", knowing all along that they will likely have to pay out less in total overall benefits since more people will die at an exponentially faster rate the older their age group gets. They don't have to pay anything if the recipient is dead.
I did all the calculations and rationale from every angle and they all pointed towards, take the money now, either before you can't because you die or you can't because the government has run out of money and/or has re-written the rules.
But take the money while you can and can spend it while you still can.
I waited until my full retirement age but looking back on it I should have taken it at 62.
At least this way I can work/earn all I want with no penalty on my SS benefit.
E. Pluribus Unum wrote:
I waited until my full retirement age but looking back on it I should have taken it at 62.
At least this way I can work/earn all I want with no penalty on my SS benefit.”
Why would it have been better to have taken it at 62?
The time value of money and the time needed to make up the difference ?
I started taking my SS at 62, but I have metastatic prostate cancer (spread to my bones in 8 spots). Talked to my CPA son, and he said I’d have to live until I was 79 to reach the break-even point. That is very unlikely, plus I get to use the money now.
Also stated getting a very small pension from a job I had for 7 years when I was in my late 20s to mid 30s.
Same thing happened to me when I called them, including not being able to understand some of them.
Why wait? My wife and i started SS at 62 because it would take enough years at the higher rates for starting later that we seemed better off by starting early. Penalty only imposes taxes on parts of SS...have no idea of what the 3 options you laid out mean...
I understand that. My specific question to them is, I’ll miss 3 payments this year and 6 next year due to the income penalty. when and how do I recover those 9 payments once I reach retirement age.
I was told, in 3 calls:
1) you get it back incrementally each month once you reach full retirement age
2) you don’t get it back, it’s gone
3) you get a lump sum check once retirement age is reached.
All I want to know is, when and how.
I haven’t a clue - I didn’t know one could recoup money not given due to making too much at the time...I thought it was just taxed more because one made “too much money”.
Does the chart Thomas Thomas posted help?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3669896/posts?page=26#26
So if the 65th birthday was in October it would be wise to wait to apply in January of the following year? will that change the benefit?
Yep. Even when you make up the difference after 10 or 15 years you made it up in dollars that were worth less.
Yes, Thanks!......................
Every year you wait you get a higher monthly check. For people who can wait and have longevity it’s wiser to wait.
With all due respect, Congressmen are mostly not financial experts. My advice, get a good financial advisor and the software today will map out retirement almost to the penny.
The Congressman him/herself do not give out financial advice.
They have staff who research the issue for the constituent.
The SS office will readily give out answers to a congressman’s office......faster and more accurate than from the SS recipient.
So, IIUC, the widow collecting the deceased higher-paid spouse’s widow benefit should not file for her own or she’ll have her payments cut to reflect her earnings?
It’s a gamble. You’re betting you’re going to live; they’re betting you’re going to die.
“It’s a veritable certainty that you are better off collecting the minute you reach 62, provided you put it into your retirement account.”
Not necessarily. It depends on whether you think you will blow through your retirement money.
I know a man who lost everything except his pension and SS because the floozy couldn’t get her hands on those.
I meant just in terms of the probable present-day value of the total amount you will eventually collect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.