Social Security at 62 vs 67

[@SecureYourRetirement]

We're delighted that you had the chance to view our recent video designed to assist you in securing your retirement! Consider checking out our next title: "Understanding the Taxability of Social Security Benefits" - kzbin.info/www/bejne/hWnWiZylrrR4b5Y

[@keithmachado-pp6fv]

One benefit of delaying SS is taxes. At most, 85% of SS is federally taxable and zero tax in many states. I will pay 50% more tax on my other ordinary income vs SS (30% vs 20). Therefore having more SS each year and larger COLAs will mean more income after tax compared to equal gross income from other assets.

[@keithmachado-pp6fv]

I understand no COLA for ease of math for this video but it is such an important variable when comparing different starting ages that it makes the conclusion suspect at best. Also SS is such a large part of their income need that to include an inflation adjustment for spending but not including a COLA is a significant flaw.

[@rodrain2]

But if a lot of their money is in traditional IRAs they will get slammed in taxes when RMDs start. Waiting and drawing some of that down will lighten that load. No?

[@keithmachado-pp6fv]

You will not get $3800 per month PIA making $150k as that is below the max SS limit where payments are made.

[@info4907]

As several have noted in comments, this was a very poor example, not only for when to take SS, but a very poor retirement plan. Here are some examples, SS is is much like an annuity, but even in todays higher interest rates, it is usually a much better deal than most annuities primarily because of the COLAs, that they did not credit toward SS from 62-67 which is not being conservative it just skews the numbers of favoring of taking SS at age 62. The second big mistake is they are not taking into account Sequence of Returns. which is why you need to balance your investments in retirement. This skews the straight line interest calculation towards taking SS at age 62. The last thing they are not taking into account is Roth conversions. which these people should be taking into account between 62 and 70. The biggest reason is because of how it effects their tax on SS.

[@info4907]

Can't agree more, very bad example and plan, In addition to the flaws mentioned above they did not take into account the preferred tax on SS. With properly timed Roth conversions they will have much more money to spend and pay less in taxes with a much better chance of success. Also the over 3 million left over at time of death will now be taxed to there heirs at a much higher rate and the heirs will have less than if properly planned.

[@josephjuno9555]

Therse are totally stupid useless examples! You start with a couple making $300,000 and maxing out 401k? That is So vastly above National Averages? Can they squeeze by with $2,500,000 until $8,000 p mo Soc Sec? Try using REAL WORLD Examples!

[@josephjuno9555]

These Millionaires don't need Advice from. Utube?

[@g.ajemian4968]

It’s a very simplistic plan it does not take RMD’s into account also a static rate of return . It also assumes both people are gonna live until 90 which we know statistically is pretty much impossible so they will lose one of those Social Security benefits at some point, which will affect their situation that’s affecting me ending balance

[@josephjuno9555]

Those people are Terrible Savers? Making $300,000 p yr? They shud been able to save FAR More that that! I make gross $50,000 and have $400,000 in 403b only doing 15% .

[@bscarry8067]

Wow 👏 those poor people 😆

[@peterkennedy5596]

Most people are NOT making 150k. So not helpful. This is for the rich. Not regular people.

[@rubiirae]

a lot of people are making above 150k nowadays...100k is the new 60k.