• The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 30 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other Owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 30 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 30th anniversary: Happy 30th Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    Free memberships for every 50 subscribers!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $21,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $21 Million dollars
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    60,000+ subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

Social Security question

easyrider

TUG Review Crew: Elite
TUG Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Messages
15,044
Reaction score
8,001
Points
948
Location
Palm Springs of Washinton
Resorts Owned
Worldmark * * Villa Del Palmar UVCI * * Vacation Internationale*
I was considering the social security spousal benefit if I were to pass before my wife, which is likely, but our life insurance kicks in so I'm no longer considering this an issue for either of us. We are living on our investments now and we have been for the last few years and we are going to be fine. At some point we might decide to cash the life insurance policies out in our 80's.

I think taking the social security at 62 makes better sense for us. I went through the ringer a couple of years ago but I feel great now and I really think we would enjoy the extra funds in our 60's more so than our 70's. So 62 it is.

Thanks everyone, especially Pam. My wife will collect her ss 18 months before me and then get about a $300 bump when I claim is what I think is going to happen.

We are going to the Social Security office one last time to positively make certain we know what is going to happen.

Bill
 
Last edited:

PamMo

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Messages
5,197
Reaction score
3,024
Points
648
Location
Missouri
You're welcome, Bill. It's funny that we're in almost the exact same place as you and your wife. We retired a few years ago and are trying to decide when we'll file, too. There are so many factors to consider, some being unpredictable (health, life span, tax laws...), so we just have to figure out what we're most comfortable with.
 
Last edited:

SmithOp

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
7,609
Reaction score
3,403
Points
499
Location
Huntington Beach, CA
Resorts Owned
HGVC King's Land 2BR Premier 23.040K Points.
You're welcome, Bill. It's funny that we're in almost in the exact same place as you and your wife. We retired a few years ago and are trying to decide when we'll file, too. There are so many factors to consider, some being unpredictable (health, life span, tax laws...), so we just have to figure out what we're most comfortable with.

I’ve got 6 months till FRA and still waffling over taking my own or filing restricted for spousal, wife took it at 62. I just made it under the wire for the Jan 2, 1952 cutoff. We have another factor to consider, adult disabled child, his SSDI is based on parent benefit.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 

bluehende

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
4,507
Reaction score
3,967
Points
598
I was considering the social security spousal benefit if I were to pass before my wife, which is likely, but our life insurance kicks in so I'm no longer considering this an issue for either of us. We are living on our investments now and we have been for the last few years and we are going to be fine. At some point we might decide to cash the life insurance policies out in our 80's.

I think taking the social security at 62 makes better sense for us. I went through the ringer a couple of years ago but I feel great now and I really think we would enjoy the extra funds in our 60's more so than our 70's. So 62 it is.

Thanks everyone, especially Pam. My wife will collect her ss 18 months before me and then get about a $300 bump when I claim is what I think is going to happen.

We are going to the Social Security office one last time to positively make certain we know what is going to happen.

Bill

I think that factor is ignored too much. If the money makes your 60's more enjoyable go for it. As a former researcher I tend to run way too many numbers. Trying to judge what the exact rules will be in a complex government program 20 yrs from now is a fools errand. Use the big issues and forget about the rest. The biggest issue to consider is "do you need it?"
 

VacationForever

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
16,196
Reaction score
10,607
Points
1,048
Location
Somewhere Out There
Our friends, a husband and wife, pretty much decided when they start SS benefits, and in my opinion they did not consider all factors. Husband's PIA is slightly higher than wife and turns 65 this year. Wife is 63. He started SS benefits 2 months short of 65. He has longevity on his side. Wife will start at 70. Wife has cancer 2 years ago and still on medications, but has signs of having cancer elsewhere in her body and her doctors are keeping a close eye on it. If we were in the same situation, I would start SS benefits right away and have husband start at 70. They pretty much decided on when to start their SS and did not want inputs so we offered none. On the other hand the husband wanted lots of info on Medicare options and we offered plenty.
 

taterhed

TUG Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
4,536
Reaction score
1,901
Points
399
Location
Virginia
Resorts Owned
Westin WKORV OFD
Marriott's Grande Vista
Worldmark x2
SVV Bella 81k
If you're considering that SSB plan remains UNCHANGED for the next 10, 15, 20 years, then you can make an educated guess about whether to draw now, later etc....

But, remember this: current analysis shows that the SSB funds will hit depletion between 2032 and 2034 (plus/minus).

Something will be done to extend or bolster future benefits between now and then.

Soooo.....your ideas about FRA/62 vs 70 etc... are all based on unstable ground. I WAS planning on draw and suspend/refund. But that's gone. I further expect the tax cap to be raised and the benefits to be taxed at a higher level.

Get it while you can....is my modest advice. Invest it if you can, save it if you can, spend it if you must.

cheers.

1. Social Security is still expected to run out of moneyin 2034. Last year, the Trustees Report expected the theoretical combined Trust Fund balances to run out in 2034, and that's the same projection that this year's report made.Jun 6, 2018
2018 Social Security Trustees Report: The 5 Things You Need to ...

https://www.fool.com/retirement/.../2018-social-security-trustees-report-the-5-things.asp...
 

easyrider

TUG Review Crew: Elite
TUG Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Messages
15,044
Reaction score
8,001
Points
948
Location
Palm Springs of Washinton
Resorts Owned
Worldmark * * Villa Del Palmar UVCI * * Vacation Internationale*
double post !!!!
 

bogey21

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
9,455
Reaction score
4,662
Points
649
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
1. Social Security is still expected to run out of moneyin 2034. Last year, the Trustees Report expected the theoretical combined Trust Fund balances to run out in 2034, and that's the same projection that this year's report made.Jun 6, 2018...

I would not worry about Social Security running out of money or benefits materially reduced. There is too big a block of voters who would be thoroughly pissed and many would be voted out of office. Eligibility age may be raised a bit but more and likely taxes will be raised to keep it going. The most logical change in this "Let the Rich Pay" environment will be to eliminate the cap and have the SS tax applied to all wages...

George
 

TravelTime

TUG Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
8,092
Reaction score
6,460
Points
499
Location
California
Resorts Owned
All Resale: MVC DPs, Marriott Ko Olina, Marriott Marbella, WKOVR-N, Four Seasons Aviara
I would not worry about Social Security running out of money or benefits materially reduced. There is too big a block of voters who would be thoroughly pissed and many would be voted out of office. Eligibility age may be raised a bit but more and likely taxes will be raised to keep it going. The most logical change in this "Let the Rich Pay" environment will be to eliminate the cap and have the SS tax applied to all wages...

George

I agree. I am glad I am only 8 years from 62.
 

Passepartout

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
28,461
Reaction score
17,213
Points
1,299
Location
Twin Falls, Eye-Duh-Hoe
current analysis shows that the SSB funds will hit depletion between 2032 and 2034 (plus/minus).

Something will be done to extend or bolster future benefits between now and then.

Soooo.....your ideas about FRA/62 vs 70 etc... are all based on unstable ground. I WAS planning on draw and suspend/refund. But that's gone. I further expect the tax cap to be raised and the benefits to be taxed at a higher level.

Get it while you can....is my modest advice. Invest it if you can, save it if you can, spend it if you must.
Remember, Even if the congressional spendthrifts do nothing, and the SS Trustfund runs dry, monthly payouts come largely from current revenue. This means that even after that happens (unlikely) checks will continue at about 75% of current amounts. Not great, but better than nothing.

I expect congress to do one or some combination of the following: Eliminate the exclusion of high income contributions. Increase the payments by the Treasury into the SS Trust fund- money they 'borrowed'. Increase the age of FRA. Means test recipients so wealthy people get less and poorer people get more. Increase taxed on SS payments.

Jim
 

tompalm

TUG Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Messages
2,073
Reaction score
347
Points
293
Location
Honolulu, Hawaii
I am getting different answers to this question about spouse social security benefit.

My spouse is older than me. I think she has the option to base her benefit off her own reported earnings or off my reported earnings. At 62 she can have a benefit of full retirement minus 27%. I think at 62 she could also choose 50% of my benefit minus the 27% which would be higher than her benefit.

I called social security and it sounds like she gets her benefit and a portion of my benefit.

Does anyone know how this works. I'm just getting the ducks in a row for later.

Thanks

Bill

I am in the same boat as you with an older spouse that filed at age 62. I started getting my SS payments last month and went through all the questions a few months ago. The way the administration explains it is like you said. She gets her normal reduced benefit and a part of yours. But, when you do the math, it boils down to half of yours minus 27 percent because she filed early. The way they explain it makes it sound like the spouse is still getting their Benifit. That is the only reason I can think of for making it seem so complicated. The bad news is after they reduce it by 27 percent, they still take $134 more out for Medicare and if she needs to purchase a supplemental insurance plan for part C and D, she will not have much left.
 

Conan

TUG Review Crew: Elite
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
3,138
Reaction score
595
Points
498
Location
Connecticut
I wasn't going to wait to age 70 although on paper, if you're a married couple, that may be the best choice for the higher earner. But I did hold out until FRA (full retirement age--age 66 for me).

Don't forget if you file before FRA and have more than a little income from a current job, your benefits will be reduced by the Retirement Test.

The main inducement to filing at 62 is the bird-in-the-hand--an extra four-plus years of (reduced) benefits. That's also why 70, or at least FRA, is best if you're a married couple. They have two horses in the race, since even if the higher earner dies young, 100% of that benefit will be paid to the surviving spouse for life.
 

taterhed

TUG Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
4,536
Reaction score
1,901
Points
399
Location
Virginia
Resorts Owned
Westin WKORV OFD
Marriott's Grande Vista
Worldmark x2
SVV Bella 81k
I would not worry about Social Security running out of money or benefits materially reduced. There is too big a block of voters who would be thoroughly pissed and many would be voted out of office. Eligibility age may be raised a bit but more and likely taxes will be raised to keep it going. The most logical change in this "Let the Rich Pay" environment will be to eliminate the cap and have the SS tax applied to all wages...

George

Remember, Even if the congressional spendthrifts do nothing, and the SS Trustfund runs dry, monthly payouts come largely from current revenue. This means that even after that happens (unlikely) checks will continue at about 75% of current amounts. Not great, but better than nothing.

I expect congress to do one or some combination of the following: Eliminate the exclusion of high income contributions. Increase the payments by the Treasury into the SS Trust fund- money they 'borrowed'. Increase the age of FRA. Means test recipients so wealthy people get less and poorer people get more. Increase taxed on SS payments.

Jim

So.... my point:

  1. I'm not retired and I'm at the peak of my (our) wage-earning years. We're the ones they are talking about when they say 'generating additional revenue streams by raising the current tax CAP'
  2. I'm not at FRA yet. I'm the one that won't be able to draw (fully) or maximize benefits (70) if they raise the FRA and max benefit ages.
  3. 'Means Testing' means (sic) 'who can we squeeze and deny benefits to...' and that would be me--and any of you who planned and saved and actually have some retirement savings/benefit plans to help you in your 'golden years.'
  4. Increased taxes on SSB's is just another way of saying 'No or less benefits for you....' and I'm the one that will be paying those increased taxes.
MY benefits--which I have fully funded for almost FORTY years--will probably be significantly, materially, reduced or even eliminated at the end of the day.

I'll remain non-political, because this is a simple question of 'when should I draw benefits to maximize my earnings/income.'

If you're after benefits ('mo money) then IMHO, grab what you can, when you can. Because, it will eventually, ultimately, be reduced in order to pay more for others later.
If you're after income (stream), then think carefully, but--again, IMHO--expect any numbers you calculate to be reduced--perhaps significantly--based on your retirement income, assets and other less-predictable financial/political factors.

I hope they decide to move a portion of the SS assets to an investment portfolio (like TSP) and generate some earnings to offset the wage-earner/retiree balance.
Frankly, it's my money and I'd like a sizable portion of it back some day.

Folks, please don't turn political on this......I'm approaching this from an actuarial standpoint and considering the options available to the financial managers and considerations that must be recognized.
 

Passepartout

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
28,461
Reaction score
17,213
Points
1,299
Location
Twin Falls, Eye-Duh-Hoe
This thread is doomed. Social Security is POLITICAL. Any solution to extend it's life and viability is, and must be- POLITICAL. To say otherwise is to take the 'ostrich' approach. Bury one's head in the sand and take what happens as fate.

We are left with what our duly elected sheep are famous for. Hopes and Prayers.

Jim
 

taterhed

TUG Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
4,536
Reaction score
1,901
Points
399
Location
Virginia
Resorts Owned
Westin WKORV OFD
Marriott's Grande Vista
Worldmark x2
SVV Bella 81k
This thread is doomed. Social Security is POLITICAL. Any solution to extend it's life and viability is, and must be- POLITICAL. To say otherwise is to take the 'ostrich' approach. Bury one's head in the sand and take what happens as fate.

We are left with what our duly elected sheep are famous for. Hopes and Prayers.

Jim


I disagree:

We can have thoughtful debate about the options and how they will impact us NOW and at retirement age.
We can make inputs to our elected officials to support reforms that make sense to us.
We can understand the cost/benefit/impact of changes by reading, learning and understanding---not just listening to sound bites on TV

This is about knowledge and how to impact the decision makers and make smart decisions ourselves.



Great info on potential changes here: https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/projections/policy-options/summary.html (USGOVT)
Great analysis and data here: https://www.urban.org/exploring-social-security-reform-options (A think tank--yes, they are oriented with providing benefits for those in need....but provided excellent data models to USGOVT)

Again, knowledge, not political debate.
 

bogey21

TUG Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
9,455
Reaction score
4,662
Points
649
Location
Fort Worth, Texas
How about this for buttressing the Social Security Fund. Let those of us who have earned our benefit but really don't need it be allowed to do the following: We agree to forego receiving one or more (our choice) of our monthly payments. In exchange for this we would be allowed to deduct the amount foregone when filing our Federal Income Tax much as one can deduct a charitable contribution...

George
 

pittle

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
4,034
Reaction score
2,146
Points
599
Location
Goodyear, AZ
Resorts Owned
Vidanta Grand Luxxe
Buganvilias Sky Suites
Pueblo Bonito Em Bay
Our decisions were take it while we can, while it's still available.

:cool:

We did that too! :cool:

With us, it was never an issue about drawing on the other's SS since we had both had similar jobs throughout our careers and made pretty much the same amount of money each year. Some years I made more and some years he did, but never more than $1000 difference. So, our SS checks are very similar. His is $50 per month more than mine. Probably because I did take off 3 years to have 2 kids and stay home until the youngest was 1. It took me a couple of years to catch back up to the same salary as his.

We decided to take SS at 62 and scale back our IRA withdrawal at the same time. It has worked well.
 

GetawaysRus

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
1,587
Reaction score
1,085
Points
523
Location
Southern California
Resorts Owned
Marriott Desert Springs Villas 2
Marriott Grand Chateau
Just an editorial comment:

Since a timeshare is a discretionary purchase, I tend to think that TUGgers are probably better off financially than the average American.

So it's interesting to read how many of us have taken our SS benefit at 62 rather than delay until FRA or later. I would have guessed that it would have been the other way. If you have some assets, and don't need the SS money for current living expenses, the financial press often tends to encourage delaying the benefit so that it increases.

I suppose that a lot of us are concerned about what the government is going to do to shore up SS in the future. Also, the GOP tax bill reduced income tax rates (probably temporarily), so a bit less of the benefit is taken out of your pocket.

So yes, my wife and I are in this camp too. We are financially secure enough that we don't need the money now. But we're "hedging our bets." She took her benefit at 62. I'm 64, but have not yet taken my benefit and am hoping to delay so that it grows. (My benefit is the larger of the two.)
 
Last edited:

Sugarcubesea

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
4,029
Reaction score
2,939
Points
449
Location
Novi, Michigan
Resorts Owned
QH, HBC, VBHC, & Pinestead Reef
That's what I will be going with. I'd like to hold out to 70 but will take it when I need it. I had never thought I would be an age 62 claimer, but I didn't think I'd get sick and have to tap the 401k, either. Crap happens, I've adjusted the plans I made.

I’m a planner, and a saver. 10 years ago I was planning on retirement at 62, since I had a pension and my company would offer me health insurance till I turned 65. Then the company declared bankruptcy and my pension and medical benefits went up in smoke. So now the plan is to work till 65 and get on Medicare but at 58 I know anything can happen. I will be happy when I sell my house next year and downsize to a small condo.
 

Sugarcubesea

TUG Review Crew
TUG Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2014
Messages
4,029
Reaction score
2,939
Points
449
Location
Novi, Michigan
Resorts Owned
QH, HBC, VBHC, & Pinestead Reef
I agree. I am glad I am only 8 years from 62.

TravelTime, I’m 7 years away from my magic retirement number of 65. I’m saving like crazy so can hit that number. I will be so happy when my plan comes together.
 

easyrider

TUG Review Crew: Elite
TUG Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Messages
15,044
Reaction score
8,001
Points
948
Location
Palm Springs of Washinton
Resorts Owned
Worldmark * * Villa Del Palmar UVCI * * Vacation Internationale*
After speaking to a few people at the Social Security department I was finally told the only one that can answer my question is a claim specialist, lol. The reason we went to their office and waited in line was because we wanted Social Security to give us an exact number on an exact scenario. Only a claims specialist can do this, not a customer service representative. Keep this in mind if you need a claims question answered.

We finally decided we were hitting the claims at 62 and defiantly know what we will get on our own claims. I thought that my wife's benefit would go up if she took half of my benefit but the reality is it isn't that much of an increase and the only way it looks good is if it isn't taken until full retirement age.

The bottom line is when I do the math the break even point is when we are almost 79 years old. After this time we would actually be making more if we went to fra.

Bill
 

easyrider

TUG Review Crew: Elite
TUG Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2005
Messages
15,044
Reaction score
8,001
Points
948
Location
Palm Springs of Washinton
Resorts Owned
Worldmark * * Villa Del Palmar UVCI * * Vacation Internationale*
This thread is doomed. Social Security is POLITICAL. Any solution to extend it's life and viability is, and must be- POLITICAL. To say otherwise is to take the 'ostrich' approach. Bury one's head in the sand and take what happens as fate.

We are left with what our duly elected sheep are famous for. Hopes and Prayers.

Jim

Knock it off Jim and Rob. :doh:

This thread is to help understand Social Security claim timing and nothing more. Please take your disagreements private.

Thanks

Bill
 
Top