If you'll have enough money in retirement whether you delay taking SS or not, then you might as well take SS early if that is your concern. Otherwise you're delaying it to have more money that you don't need. Remember that retirement planning is planning for the future. You can always spend all of your money today because you don't know if you'll live to see tomorrow. So you are investing for the future because you either need or want the money in the future.
Also, think about your health. If you're healthy enough to take it 62, do it because you never know how long you gonna live. I would lose money, but I would take it at 62. I would like to enjoy the freedom of not having to work before I drop dead before I retire.
Truth be told you don't lose any money unless you live into your 80's. It's important to know that less per month does not mean less money total. You have to remember that taking the money early means less per month, but you will be drawing the money for a longer period time. I took the money at age 62 because time is more valuable than money. While it is true that taking the money at 62 you will get less per month, but you will also draw the money for a longer period of time. I will get 48 more checks than the person who waits until age 66 and 96 more checks than the person who waits until age 70. Truth be told, the only way know for sure is to know the exact date of your death. Since I didn't have that information I looked at family history. My dad died when he was 80. He did have a brother who lived to 87, but he also had a brother and sister who died in their 60's. Based on that I took the money early because the 4 extra years (age 66) or 8 extra years (age 70) I got for retiring at age 62 were worth far more than any money I might have gotten after age 80. It's a personal choice and everyone get's to chose what's best for them. For me getting as many as 8 extra years without any loss of income was too good a deal to turn down.
This channel does a great job with content, just a personal pet peeve of mine ... discussion is always about 62 vs 67 ... when for me the sweet spot is in the middle at 64 1/2!
2 friends of mine waited till 67 to get the full amount. Both seemed healthy. Both dropped dead of heart attacks before drawing a dime. Sad but very true. And now in the news- possible insolvency for the entire system in 10 years. Take it while you can get it or roll the dice gamblers. Your choice.
I'm 67 and recently retired. If I start collecting SS now, my monthly check will be $3,760. If I wait until 70 it will be $4,719. Collecting now would be foolish
@@edrodgers4581 if you have health issues and a history of short family longevity it makes sense to take social security earlier than later. If you are in your 60’s and still working with a high stress job it also may make sense. There is no right or wrong answer. It depends on everyone’s individual circumstances. My 2 friends died before 67 with every good intention of maximizing their return. The never saw a dime and Both were still working in a high stress environment. No one lives forever and when your time is up it’s over- obviously.
The problem with discussing Social Security retirement with financial planners is that the decision is as much about time and luck as it is investments, ROI and they economy.
You should have one more column. Take out SS at 62 and invest the $ until you're 67 before you spend it. (It's like waiting until 67 with less risk and at the same time make more $ overall). The break even point gets push out a lot further.
Informative video, but I highly recommend that they get their Home Equity Line before they retire. Otherwise, they will have plenty of equity, but significantly less income. There is also a big difference in traveling at age 62 or 65 vs 70, as your body starts to break down. You don’t feel it until you are that age.
Love your videos !! Thanks for the information. A lot to think of as we try to target when we retire. I love the "living organism" analogy. Roll with the punches and flex as we go!
Another option is to take it 62 and suspend at 67 and start collecting it again at 70. This allows you collect for a few years and then decide if you want to add 24% to your monthly check 8% per year increase.
I'm 67 and recently retired. If I start collecting SS now, my monthly check will be $3,760. If I wait until 70 it will be $4,719. Collecting now would be foolish
@@edrodgers4581 try running a spreadsheet where you invest the money at 5% above inflation and draw out what you would if you wait. you will be over 100 before you break even, if you live until you are 70 you will have 8 years of income if you took it and 0 if you didn't. if you invested that 8 years of income it will beat anything you will ever get after 70. a dollar in your hand is worth 2 in the bush and 10 in the hands of the federal government. a wise man makes his money work for him, a fool works for his money. waiting would be foolish, investing 70% now is a better bet.
Everyone is different, health, 0:56 side income, 1:04 nest egg, I am waiting until 65 and 2 months to draw. It helps pump my wife's up. Already retired but waiting to draw.
Very informative video Troy. There is one scenario missing in your evaluation. What if one spouse started at age 62 and the other started at FRA considering they both made the same amount per year and either one would get the same amount from Social Security. Or, which way would be better, one spouse made 75,000 per year and the other made and average of 125,000 per year? Would it be advantageous for the higher earner to take it early and the lower earner wait until FRA, or the higher earner wait until FRA and the lower earner take it early? Also input the new scenario with the same retirement ages as you spoke of in this video? I know there are multiple outcomes, that is why the plan has to be monitored and adjusted through retirement. Thank you again for all the work you put into these videos. The value I get out of them is very useful and valuable.
Assuming two people of similar age, and that they will both live to FRA if not 70, collect the SS benefits for the smaller benefit first if it's enough money. The larger benefit can be deferred until later. Should one person pass away the remaining benefit will be larger of the two. The exception to this is if the person with the larger benefit is likely to pass before the person with the lower benefit, and the person with the lower benefit will eventually have a higher benefit if deferred due to the other person passing away early.
It’s meaningless without your spending goals also where you plan to live in retirement. He would need to know how much you need to live plus any anything extra for things like travel. For me and the wife I need 60 after taxes but I want 72 k per year after taxes per year.
John L you pretty much described me. The fat 401(k), which is now a IRA. And a fat pension. I took my Social Security at 62. I don’t care how you slice it. The grand total of money you will receive by the time you’re 80 will be more than that if you took it at 65,67 or 70. Here is something nobody is talking about and it is very serious. In 2035 Social Security administration is going to cut everybody Social Security by 20%. If I took my Social Security at 70 I will only receive five years of my full check before they cut it by 20%. This is big it has to be in the equation.
We would love to answer your questions. Please click the link below to request a free consultation with our financial advisors: click2retire.com/socialsecuri...
how long will you live? doesn't matter how healthy you are, accidents happen. So if I could take it at age 62 and the breakeven doesn't happen until age 82, knowing that I could check out anywhere in those 20 years between 62 and 82 why would I take the risk of deferring? The beer in hand is worth two in the fridge.
of course they did, the government wants to keep as much of it as they can. try running a spreadsheet where you invest the money at 5% above inflation and draw out what you would if you wait. you will be over 100 before you break even, if you live until you are 70 you will have 8 years of income if you took it and 0 if you didn't. if you invested that 8 years of income it will beat anything you will ever get after 70. a dollar in your hand is worth 2 in the bush and 10 in the hands of the federal government. a wise man makes his money work for him, a fool works for his money
@@richardargst157 it doesn’t always make sense as such. Do you realize spousal benefits are only half up to FRA not 70. If spouse is older then there are bigger issues because he or she can’t start collecting half until main spouse starts receiving SS. The ideal age spread in your scenario is main earner takes at 70 because the spouse is 3 years younger 67. But now flip flop it. The spousal benefit person is 3 years older. Imagine this person being 70. You’re telling this person to wait 3 more years until 73 so the main spouse can turn to 70 but yet only get half of what it would be at 67 not 70. The break even point is starting to get up there. It’s beyond 85 years old. From a survivors benefit it’s better to wait until 70.
I used many online tools and even AI, and the biggest variable in estimating the optimal age for retirement is, by far, annual expenses. When you start collecting SS only matters if you expect to have high annual spending. So, a middle-class couple that believe they need $100k per year is completely out of their minds...
Hi @phd_angel4192, thanks for watching and for sharing your thoughts - everyone has different goals in mind when it comes to retirement, and this was just showing ways to try and accomplish one of them! Take care.
What no one talks about is the work penalty if you work while on SS. If you are 62-66 & 11months and work and make over the limit of 22K you are penalized by having your SS taken away dollar by dollar. If you are that old and can make that little then go ahead, but that is not much money for a lot of people -- And to top it off, My wife's SS got penalized for me (not retired/no SS) working and making high dollars. She stays home and crochets and enjoys her retirement while I work 15 hour days to build up my retirement and SS and the gov. penalizes her SS with taxes that otherwise she wouldn't have to pay!!!! I'm working till I am 67 and enjoying my high income wages and will receive $600 extra a month for waiting.
Would like for you to do an analysis, taking SS at age 64 with the primary SS and the other on spousal support with the primary passing away early and how that affects the SS decision.
I will take at 62 and use the govt money instead of my investments. I can continue increasing my net worth for my children through my retirements. If I wait to take SS income r]then I am using my children’s inheritance. They do not get my SS income so I will use the govt benefit and keep my investment monies for my heirs.
Hi @silverfox6856! We're happy to hear you're using a strategy that works for you! If you need help and you'd like to discuss this further with one of our advisors, click click2retire.com/socialsecurity62vs67 and request a free appointment.
The problem with this couple is they did not save enough for their desired spending...thats a common problem that many Financial Planners don't talk about. One key input is what assumptions are used for the returns of the investments...
If you don't know the "how long will I live" part of the equation...there is no way to get the correct answer. Don't take it until you need it is the best advice.a...IMO.
It's good to run the numbers to determine the optimal time to take it. I intend to delay taking it until the optimal time. If I die before then, well, that sucks! However, I can at least stop thinking about how how money is left.😏
@@richardargst157 That works for some people, but not all. Everyone's situation is different. Some need/want it at 62, some don't need it and can wait until FRA and some don't need it every and will be forced to take at 70.
I'm 67 and recently retired. If I start collecting SS now, my monthly check will be $3,760. If I wait until 70 it will be $4,719. Collecting now would be foolish
Perhaps you need to look at this a different way. I'm 69 and retired at age 62 and started taking my SS at that time. I looked at a lot of videos and many of them suggest you wait to get the higher monthly payment. The problem is people don't think about the fact that more per month does not mean more total money. The only way you can possibly know for sure which age is best to start taking your SS is if you know the exact date of your death. Otherwise you are just guessing. You also need to ask yourself what is the value of time. The reason that SS is less per month at age 62 is because you will draw more checks. I got my SS statement that showed me my choices and I ran the numbers for age 62, 66 and 70. All three payments pulled even at 79 years and 8 months. So basically that means if I die before 79 years and 8 months I will have drawn more money at age 62 than if I had waited to age 66, or age 70. The problem is I don't know when I am going to die. So I guessed. My dad died when he was 80. He did have a brother who died at 87, but he also had a brother and sister who died in their 60's. You also need to consider "quality of life". Which is more valuable. Having more free time when you are in your early 60's, or more money when you are almost 80? The second question is "do you care how much money you leave behind for your family to fight over? I know I didn't. I went thru that when my dad died and I would not wish that on anyone. The most important thing I learned in these 7 years is that time is your biggest asset, but you can't put a number on it because you are not given the expiration date. So for me it came down to which is more valuable, time, or money? I took the time. For me it was well worth it. Just something to think about.
You also need to consider taxes - if your other income is substantial you may owe 30% or more on ur ss. That 1000 dollars more might be more like 700. Might as well take it at 67. In my case i drcided to take it at 63. RMDs from IRAs might put you in a much higher tax bracket than you imagine
@@edrodgers4581 I would gladly have accepted pay cuts had I been given more time off. in this case, I would be giving up 7 years worth of money that I can either spend or invest. One has no idea how their health will be in another year, much less another 7 years.
I Love your youtube channel! I'm nearing retirement (5-7 yrs out) and my wife of 10 years just obtained her "Green Card". Will she be entitled to any SS (Spousal?) if she hasn't worked in the US? Would she be entitled to Survivor benefits? .
Hi my parents did not make it to 76 grandparents did not make it to 60. I had to retire at 59.5 for health reasons I will do ssa at 62. I have been denial ssa disable
Except they won’t cut people with small checks, that wouldn’t look right. The guy with a $1500 check won’t be cut, it’ll be the guy with the $3000 check. They’ll just pull everyone down to $1500 a month and once again the savers get screwed and the spenders get bailed out.
There is a risk to delaying Social Security that is not being discussed. The trust fund is going broke. By recent projections it will run out of money around 2035. Congress will address this. They could push back retirement age (again!), reduce benefits across the board, raise SS taxes on the workforce, means test, or what I consider most likely- capping benefits at a specific dollar amount with means testing. This will screw (for lack of a better word) those that delay in anticipation of a larger check. How much do you trust politicians? That is what the take it early crowd sees that others ignore.
Thank you for your insightful comment. This is a topic that often comes up in conversations with our clients. Please see our recent livestream titled Maximize your Social Security Income and Pay Less Tax czcams.com/users/liveZKL0zEeWT2s?feature=share (starting at minute 1:56) where Ed and Troy discuss this important issue. This is why we work with our clients to develop multiple streams of income in addition to Social Security benefits. Please reach out if you would like us to help you plan for retirement by going to click2retire.com/socialsecurity62vs67
Do you want to actually enjoy retirement? Or indentured servitude? How healthy are you going to be at 67 or 70 vs 62? I'd rather die on an adventure than at a desk. Food for thought. ❤
Social security at 62 or 67 I like to see a video based upon the blue colllar worker since the blue collar middle class make up the majority of this country.
Hi @nrpforty! We work with many blue collar workers who have been able to save up large amounts for retirement. We appreciate your feedback and will add it to our content idea list to specifically address in the future! Thanks for watching our channel.
Don’t bank on dying Young be smart and do the math. It’s obvious to wait until 67 unless you have a very bad health issue now or if you’re super poor both of which I hope is not the case but that’s the only reason to take it at 62.
This really isn’t a fair analysis for the 67 and 70 scenario. It overly favors the 62 group also. Of course the success can go down for the 70 if one retires at 61 but in reality those waiting until 70 already have plans to work until perhaps 65 when Medicare kicks in. Let’s face it. When it comes down to the scenario of not running out of money then of course the longer one works and and takes SS at 70 will always win out. Even if one dies before, at least the money didn’t run out. Now there is a different game of life to see who can enjoy retirement the longest and not run out of money. We each enjoy retirement differently. Some feel the need to spend to enjoy. Some enjoy by just having the extra free time. Spend time with grandkids. If 62 works for some folks then good for them.
@@johnnyadams1755 If you are financially desperate collect SS at 62. If you were able to keep a job when you were young you should have enough saved to wait until you are 70.
Silly, if you take it at 62 versus 66, at age 80 you will break even anyways (total amount by that time would be the same). Also, if you die before you apply for it, then your spouse gets no SS benefit from you. It’s way smarter to take it early, especially if you aren’t planning on working anymore.
Hi Dave, thanks for watching and sharing your perspective! Everyone has unique circumstances and in our videos, we try to show what might be possible for just one of many different situations that could be out there. Even then - there are still so many nuances and we always recommend booking time with a financial advisor to find the most effective route to the retirement you're looking to have. If you ever find yourself wondering, you can book a free consultation at this link here - click2retire.com/socialsecurity62vs67. Take care!
You should do a separate video for the middle class people that are around 63 that went through the 80's that got laid off numerous times by the people making 75 grand like in this video except where they don't have 1 million dollars saved up and they had to numerous times cash in their 401K to survive and now have only 20 grand and their SS now would pay 1500 dollars a month. This video is for the elites only that never obviously got laid off and made 75 grand all these years. @@OakHarvestFinancialGroup
i make 4,600 dollars with ss and union pension and 1 other source plus my wife makes 1,000 so 5,600 a month home is paid for i dont have any bills my home is worth 1 million 300 thousand dollars i took it at 62 plus my great state of ny cuts my property tax 50 percent at 65
My brother passed away and got not one social security check! I'm taking it as soon as possible and when I can still able to travel without a walker.
✅☑️✅☑️
So what will you do for Health insurance? You are too young to sign up for Medicare and you gave up your employer insurance.
If you'll have enough money in retirement whether you delay taking SS or not, then you might as well take SS early if that is your concern. Otherwise you're delaying it to have more money that you don't need.
Remember that retirement planning is planning for the future. You can always spend all of your money today because you don't know if you'll live to see tomorrow. So you are investing for the future because you either need or want the money in the future.
I suppose you will also not be buying a new car?
I'm surprised working part time was not mentioned. The ability to still earn $19600 per year and collect SS at 62 is an great option for me.
having a pension with no debt changes things dramatically
Also, think about your health. If you're healthy enough to take it 62, do it because you never know how long you gonna live. I would lose money, but I would take it at 62. I would like to enjoy the freedom of not having to work before I drop dead before I retire.
If you are 62 would you buy a new car? Using your logic about SS the answer would be no.
Agreed
I took mine at 62. Politicians are hoping you die before age 70. You have to do the math and know what your breakeven age is.
@@thebootielover Breakeven age? Look at your SS statement.
Truth be told you don't lose any money unless you live into your 80's. It's important to know that less per month does not mean less money total. You have to remember that taking the money early means less per month, but you will be drawing the money for a longer period time. I took the money at age 62 because time is more valuable than money. While it is true that taking the money at 62 you will get less per month, but you will also draw the money for a longer period of time. I will get 48 more checks than the person who waits until age 66 and 96 more checks than the person who waits until age 70. Truth be told, the only way know for sure is to know the exact date of your death. Since I didn't have that information I looked at family history. My dad died when he was 80. He did have a brother who lived to 87, but he also had a brother and sister who died in their 60's. Based on that I took the money early because the 4 extra years (age 66) or 8 extra years (age 70) I got for retiring at age 62 were worth far more than any money I might have gotten after age 80. It's a personal choice and everyone get's to chose what's best for them. For me getting as many as 8 extra years without any loss of income was too good a deal to turn down.
This channel does a great job with content, just a personal pet peeve of mine ... discussion is always about 62 vs 67 ... when for me the sweet spot is in the middle at 64 1/2!
I took mine at 62. Politicians are hoping you die before age 70. You have to do the math and know what your breakeven age is.
@T Raybern newspapers are full of stories of people who retired at 65 and died before 70.
Unless u die b4 70
2 friends of mine waited till 67 to get the full amount. Both seemed healthy. Both dropped dead of heart attacks before drawing a dime. Sad but very true. And now in the news- possible insolvency for the entire system in 10 years. Take it while you can get it or roll the dice gamblers. Your choice.
I'm 67 and recently retired. If I start collecting SS now, my monthly check will be $3,760. If I wait until 70 it will be $4,719. Collecting now would be foolish
@@edrodgers4581 Depends on your health I would say. Glad you are healthy and active.
@@bill648 Why does it depend on one's health?
@@edrodgers4581 if you have health issues and a history of short family longevity it makes sense to take social security earlier than later. If you are in your 60’s and still working with a high stress job it also may make sense. There is no right or wrong answer. It depends on everyone’s individual circumstances. My 2 friends died before 67 with every good intention of maximizing their return. The never saw a dime and Both were still working in a high stress environment. No one lives forever and when your time is up it’s over- obviously.
What does your friends date of death have to do with you?
Retiring and taking SS are not the same thing. Retire whenever you want to, start SS at 70.
The problem with discussing Social Security retirement with financial planners is that the decision is as much about time and luck as it is investments, ROI and they economy.
No, look at your SS statement. Take SS at FRA or 70.
@@richardargst157.. Not for everyone no one size fits all.
You should have one more column. Take out SS at 62 and invest the $ until you're 67 before you spend it. (It's like waiting until 67 with less risk and at the same time make more $ overall). The break even point gets push out a lot further.
Hey there @need2retire543! Thanks for watching and sharing your ideas!
Informative video, but I highly recommend that they get their Home Equity Line before they retire. Otherwise, they will have plenty of equity, but significantly less income. There is also a big difference in traveling at age 62 or 65 vs 70, as your body starts to break down. You don’t feel it until you are that age.
My sweet spot is 70. I'm going to live forever.
This was very well done and helpful. Thank you.
Love your videos !! Thanks for the information. A lot to think of as we try to target when we retire. I love the "living organism" analogy. Roll with the punches and flex as we go!
81 percent then moving to another country, you can live real well!
Exactly. Math is not always the answer. There are many factors that are not widely talked about.
The math says take SS at 70. Why accept a check at 62 that is 64% smaller????
Another option is to take it 62 and suspend at 67 and start collecting it again at 70. This allows you collect for a few years and then decide if you want to add 24% to your monthly check 8% per year increase.
You have a alot of faith of them getting that right? Good luck? There are so many ways that cud get messy?
Claimed mine at 62. My brother turns 62 next year and I advised him to do the same.
Did you advise your brother not to buy a new car too?
I'm 67 and recently retired. If I start collecting SS now, my monthly check will be $3,760. If I wait until 70 it will be $4,719. Collecting now would be foolish
@@edrodgers4581. Unless you drop dead or get sick.
You are trusting the government not to screw you while the SS trust fund goes broke.
@@edrodgers4581
try running a spreadsheet where you invest the money at 5% above inflation and draw out what you would if you wait. you will be over 100 before you break even, if you live until you are 70 you will have 8 years of income if you took it and 0 if you didn't. if you invested that 8 years of income it will beat anything you will ever get after 70. a dollar in your hand is worth 2 in the bush and 10 in the hands of the federal government. a wise man makes his money work for him, a fool works for his money. waiting would be foolish, investing 70% now is a better bet.
Everyone is different, health, 0:56 side income, 1:04 nest egg, I am waiting until 65 and 2 months to draw. It helps pump my wife's up. Already retired but waiting to draw.
Very informative video Troy. There is one scenario missing in your evaluation. What if one spouse started at age 62 and the other started at FRA considering they both made the same amount per year and either one would get the same amount from Social Security. Or, which way would be better, one spouse made 75,000 per year and the other made and average of 125,000 per year? Would it be advantageous for the higher earner to take it early and the lower earner wait until FRA, or the higher earner wait until FRA and the lower earner take it early? Also input the new scenario with the same retirement ages as you spoke of in this video? I know there are multiple outcomes, that is why the plan has to be monitored and adjusted through retirement. Thank you again for all the work you put into these videos. The value I get out of them is very useful and valuable.
Assuming two people of similar age, and that they will both live to FRA if not 70, collect the SS benefits for the smaller benefit first if it's enough money. The larger benefit can be deferred until later. Should one person pass away the remaining benefit will be larger of the two. The exception to this is if the person with the larger benefit is likely to pass before the person with the lower benefit, and the person with the lower benefit will eventually have a higher benefit if deferred due to the other person passing away early.
Please discuss a case where someone has about $1M in 401K and retires at age 60 or 61? Then delays SS until about 64 or 65.
It’s meaningless without your spending goals also where you plan to live in retirement. He would need to know how much you need to live plus any anything extra for things like travel. For me and the wife I need 60 after taxes but I want 72 k per year after taxes per year.
I took mine at 62. Politicians are hoping you die before age 70. You have to do the math and know what your breakeven age is.
John L you pretty much described me. The fat 401(k), which is now a IRA. And a fat pension. I took my Social Security at 62.
I don’t care how you slice it. The grand total of money you will receive by the time you’re 80 will be more than that if you took it at 65,67 or 70.
Here is something nobody is talking about and it is very serious. In 2035 Social Security administration is going to cut everybody Social Security by 20%.
If I took my Social Security at 70 I will only receive five years of my full check before they cut it by 20%. This is big it has to be in the equation.
So much talk about 62 or 67? I'm thinking of taking it at 65 when I start Medicare?
We would love to answer your questions. Please click the link below to request a free consultation with our financial advisors: click2retire.com/socialsecuri...
Wait until you are 70. Look at your SS statement. Why take a small check??
@@tomblevins5020 If you live to 70. Taking a lot for granted.
@@al.g.7125 If I don't make it what is the problem? I won't miss it when I'm dead. LOL
how long will you live? doesn't matter how healthy you are, accidents happen. So if I could take it at age 62 and the breakeven doesn't happen until age 82, knowing that I could check out anywhere in those 20 years between 62 and 82 why would I take the risk of deferring? The beer in hand is worth two in the fridge.
You are being foolish. If you collect at 62, you will regret opting for a puny check later.
I was able to avoid being fired while I worked. Therefore I am not financially desperate. I'll collect at 70
the reason to defer, of course, that you could check out between 82 and 102. you already know you dont know how long you will live
SSA told me not to take my late wife's benefits, but take mine at FRA higher rate then keep working until I'm 70.
of course they did, the government wants to keep as much of it as they can.
try running a spreadsheet where you invest the money at 5% above inflation and draw out what you would if you wait. you will be over 100 before you break even, if you live until you are 70 you will have 8 years of income if you took it and 0 if you didn't. if you invested that 8 years of income it will beat anything you will ever get after 70. a dollar in your hand is worth 2 in the bush and 10 in the hands of the federal government. a wise man makes his money work for him, a fool works for his money
Taking mine at 62. I will be ahead than waiting at fra. Breakeven is 78. 😊
Thanks for watching and sharing, @phillyboylaboy!
Those are not the only options. I am taking it at 64 1/2. Every month between 62 and 67 is also an option.
The only option that makes sense is to take SS at 70. What would anyone want a small check??
@@richardargst157 it doesn’t always make sense as such.
Do you realize spousal benefits are only half up to FRA not 70.
If spouse is older then there are bigger issues because he or she can’t start collecting half until main spouse starts receiving SS.
The ideal age spread in your scenario is main earner takes at 70 because the spouse is 3 years younger 67.
But now flip flop it. The spousal benefit person is 3 years older.
Imagine this person being 70. You’re telling this person to wait 3 more years until 73 so the main spouse can turn to 70 but yet only get half of what it would be at 67 not 70.
The break even point is starting to get up there. It’s beyond 85 years old.
From a survivors benefit it’s better to wait until 70.
@@f430ferrari5 You are twisting a simple concept.
@@richardargst157 no I’m not. All I did was add in other factors that you yourself didn’t consider.
@@f430ferrari5 Other factors? The objective is to collect a large check.
I used many online tools and even AI, and the biggest variable in estimating the optimal age for retirement is, by far, annual expenses. When you start collecting SS only matters if you expect to have high annual spending. So, a middle-class couple that believe they need $100k per year is completely out of their minds...
Hi @phd_angel4192, thanks for watching and for sharing your thoughts - everyone has different goals in mind when it comes to retirement, and this was just showing ways to try and accomplish one of them! Take care.
I am 63.5 years old. Waiting for Medicare age 65.
That’s what I am planning on doing
Wait until your FRA.
What no one talks about is the work penalty if you work while on SS. If you are 62-66 & 11months and work and make over the limit of 22K you are penalized by having your SS taken away dollar by dollar. If you are that old and can make that little then go ahead, but that is not much money for a lot of people -- And to top it off, My wife's SS got penalized for me (not retired/no SS) working and making high dollars. She stays home and crochets and enjoys her retirement while I work 15 hour days to build up my retirement and SS and the gov. penalizes her SS with taxes that otherwise she wouldn't have to pay!!!! I'm working till I am 67 and enjoying my high income wages and will receive $600 extra a month for waiting.
There are many years in between. Split the difference and do 64.5
Would like for you to do an analysis, taking SS at age 64 with the primary SS and the other on spousal support with the primary passing away early and how that affects the SS decision.
I will take at 62 and use the govt money instead of my investments. I can continue increasing my net worth for my children through my retirements. If I wait to take SS income r]then I am using my children’s inheritance. They do not get my SS income so I will use the govt benefit and keep my investment monies for my heirs.
Hi @silverfox6856! We're happy to hear you're using a strategy that works for you! If you need help and you'd like to discuss this further with one of our advisors, click click2retire.com/socialsecurity62vs67 and request a free appointment.
The problem with this couple is they did not save enough for their desired spending...thats a common problem that many Financial Planners don't talk about. One key input is what assumptions are used for the returns of the investments...
We definitely agree that it's important to consider your spending goals when deciding how much you need saved for retirement! Thanks for watching.
Took Social Security at 38 on SSDI
I think if you are in the green go with the early retirement if possible. Life is not a trial run. No luggage rack in a Hearse
If you don't know the "how long will I live" part of the equation...there is no way to get the correct answer. Don't take it until you need it is the best advice.a...IMO.
It's good to run the numbers to determine the optimal time to take it. I intend to delay taking it until the optimal time. If I die before then, well, that sucks! However, I can at least stop thinking about how how money is left.😏
Take SS at 70. Be smart!
@@richardargst157 That works for some people, but not all. Everyone's situation is different. Some need/want it at 62, some don't need it and can wait until FRA and some don't need it every and will be forced to take at 70.
@@heymoe1179 If you "need it" at 62 you should not retire. until you are 70.
@@richardargst157 Some cannot work until they are 70. Like I said, it's a decision unique to everyones situation.
I'm 67 and recently retired. If I start collecting SS now, my monthly check will be $3,760. If I wait until 70 it will be $4,719. Collecting now would be foolish
Perhaps you need to look at this a different way. I'm 69 and retired at age 62 and started taking my SS at that time. I looked at a lot of videos and many of them suggest you wait to get the higher monthly payment. The problem is people don't think about the fact that more per month does not mean more total money. The only way you can possibly know for sure which age is best to start taking your SS is if you know the exact date of your death. Otherwise you are just guessing. You also need to ask yourself what is the value of time. The reason that SS is less per month at age 62 is because you will draw more checks. I got my SS statement that showed me my choices and I ran the numbers for age 62, 66 and 70. All three payments pulled even at 79 years and 8 months. So basically that means if I die before 79 years and 8 months I will have drawn more money at age 62 than if I had waited to age 66, or age 70. The problem is I don't know when I am going to die. So I guessed. My dad died when he was 80. He did have a brother who died at 87, but he also had a brother and sister who died in their 60's. You also need to consider "quality of life". Which is more valuable. Having more free time when you are in your early 60's, or more money when you are almost 80? The second question is "do you care how much money you leave behind for your family to fight over? I know I didn't. I went thru that when my dad died and I would not wish that on anyone. The most important thing I learned in these 7 years is that time is your biggest asset, but you can't put a number on it because you are not given the expiration date. So for me it came down to which is more valuable, time, or money? I took the time. For me it was well worth it. Just something to think about.
You also need to consider taxes - if your other income is substantial you may owe 30% or more on ur ss. That 1000 dollars more might be more like 700. Might as well take it at 67. In my case i drcided to take it at 63. RMDs from IRAs might put you in a much higher tax bracket than you imagine
@@marcykaren Wait until you are 70. Why accept a puny check? Did you ask for pay cuts when you worked???
@@edrodgers4581 I would gladly have accepted pay cuts had I been given more time off. in this case, I would be giving up 7 years worth of money that I can either spend or invest. One has no idea how their health will be in another year, much less another 7 years.
I Love your youtube channel! I'm nearing retirement (5-7 yrs out) and my wife of 10 years just obtained her "Green Card". Will she be entitled to any SS (Spousal?) if she hasn't worked in the US? Would she be entitled to Survivor benefits?
.
Yes, she is entitled.
Hi my parents did not make it to 76 grandparents did not make it to 60. I had to retire at 59.5 for health reasons I will do ssa at 62. I have been denial ssa disable
Hi @sw5996, thanks for watching and sharing your experience!
take at 65, so when they drop your ss by 30% it will almost be the same as taking it at 62.
Take it at 70 Bill. What is your rush to get to the Federal welfare trough?
Except they won’t cut people with small checks, that wouldn’t look right. The guy with a $1500 check won’t be cut, it’ll be the guy with the $3000 check. They’ll just pull everyone down to $1500 a month and once again the savers get screwed and the spenders get bailed out.
I was able to avoid being fired while I worked. Therefore I am not financially desperate. I'll collect at 70
There is a risk to delaying Social Security that is not being discussed. The trust fund is going broke. By recent projections it will run out of money around 2035. Congress will address this. They could push back retirement age (again!), reduce benefits across the board, raise SS taxes on the workforce, means test, or what I consider most likely- capping benefits at a specific dollar amount with means testing. This will screw (for lack of a better word) those that delay in anticipation of a larger check. How much do you trust politicians?
That is what the take it early crowd sees that others ignore.
Thank you for your insightful comment. This is a topic that often comes up in conversations with our clients. Please see our recent livestream titled Maximize your Social Security Income and Pay Less Tax czcams.com/users/liveZKL0zEeWT2s?feature=share (starting at minute 1:56) where Ed and Troy discuss this important issue. This is why we work with our clients to develop multiple streams of income in addition to Social Security benefits. Please reach out if you would like us to help you plan for retirement by going to click2retire.com/socialsecurity62vs67
If you are walking a few miles tonight consider waiting until FRA If your sitting on couch eating cheetos you may want to draw @ 62
Do you want to actually enjoy retirement? Or indentured servitude? How healthy are you going to be at 67 or 70 vs 62? I'd rather die on an adventure
than at a desk. Food for thought. ❤
food for thought: you can retire early and take ss late as you like@@kimberlyhobin1734
No right or wrong answer
Hey Bruce, we agree! The answer all depends on your own unique situation, goals, and risk tolerance. Thanks for watching and commenting!
Social security at 62 or 67 I like to see a video based upon the blue colllar worker since the blue collar middle class make up the majority of this country.
Hi @nrpforty! We work with many blue collar workers who have been able to save up large amounts for retirement. We appreciate your feedback and will add it to our content idea list to specifically address in the future! Thanks for watching our channel.
My husband retired Age 65, full benefit, 67 we have two year gap should we take 65 or 67
Gap? What does that mean???
I like that Jacket
Thanks Rick!
Don’t bank on dying Young be smart and do the math. It’s obvious to wait until 67 unless you have a very bad health issue now or if you’re super poor both of which I hope is not the case but that’s the only reason to take it at 62.
why is it not obvious to wait to 70
why did you leave out 70
Excellent point
This really isn’t a fair analysis for the 67 and 70 scenario. It overly favors the 62 group also.
Of course the success can go down for the 70 if one retires at 61 but in reality those waiting until 70 already have plans to work until perhaps 65 when Medicare kicks in.
Let’s face it. When it comes down to the scenario of not running out of money then of course the longer one works and and takes SS at 70 will always win out.
Even if one dies before, at least the money didn’t run out.
Now there is a different game of life to see who can enjoy retirement the longest and not run out of money.
We each enjoy retirement differently. Some feel the need to spend to enjoy. Some enjoy by just having the extra free time. Spend time with grandkids.
If 62 works for some folks then good for them.
Try 70 now as the Fed is going to move it from 67 to 70.
Wealthy people take SS at 70. Poor people take it at 62. Be smart. Do what wealthy people do.
That may not be smart for some people.
@@johnnyadams1755 If you are financially desperate collect SS at 62. If you were able to keep a job when you were young you should have enough saved to wait until you are 70.
And what do you do at 70?
Silly, if you take it at 62 versus 66, at age 80 you will break even anyways (total amount by that time would be the same). Also, if you die before you apply for it, then your spouse gets no SS benefit from you. It’s way smarter to take it early, especially if you aren’t planning on working anymore.
HEHEHEHE.... THAT'S YOUR OWN VIEW ..,.. YUP MONEY IS NEEDED BUT BELIEVE ME MONEY IS NOT EVERYTHING ......
Wow is this video out of touch with reality
Hi Dave, thanks for watching and sharing your perspective! Everyone has unique circumstances and in our videos, we try to show what might be possible for just one of many different situations that could be out there. Even then - there are still so many nuances and we always recommend booking time with a financial advisor to find the most effective route to the retirement you're looking to have. If you ever find yourself wondering, you can book a free consultation at this link here - click2retire.com/socialsecurity62vs67. Take care!
You should do a separate video for the middle class people that are around 63 that went through the 80's that got laid off numerous times by the people making 75 grand like in this video except where they don't have 1 million dollars saved up and they had to numerous times cash in their 401K to survive and now have only 20 grand and their SS now would pay 1500 dollars a month. This video is for the elites only that never obviously got laid off and made 75 grand all these years.
@@OakHarvestFinancialGroup
i make 4,600 dollars with ss and union pension and 1 other source plus my wife makes 1,000 so 5,600 a month home is paid for i dont have any bills my home is worth 1 million 300 thousand dollars i took it at 62 plus my great state of ny cuts my property tax 50 percent at 65
Do I need to become a client first before you do this analysis for me with my data and give me an answer?
😔 𝓟Ř𝔬𝓂𝔬𝐒ϻ