I was told to file at 62, but I don't even know if I will live that long. I am healthy now, but one never knows. I would like to wait until I am 66 to draw more on what little I do have in it.
2007-09-14 01:55:21 · 4 answers · asked by Pat 1 in Business & Finance ➔ Taxes ➔ United States
If I were you and could wait until I was 66, then I would wait.
2007-09-14 01:58:38 · answer #1 · answered by James H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you reture at 62 you will be take a 25% reduction of what you would be entitled to at 66. You would be ahead of the game if you live for 16 years, after that it would pay to wait. If you continue to work, your benefits will be reduced by $1 for each $2 you earn over a limit set by Socail Security. If you work past age 66, your benefits would be increased by 8% per year up to age 70. If you don't have a lot of earnings in the equation now because you were a stay at home mom living on what your husband brought home, you will be entitled to half of his benefit if it is more than all of yours.
2007-09-14 09:57:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I say file for benefits at 62. I am 62. I am getting my benefits. Theoretically, you will get the same amount of money, in the long run. A little less each year but for a longer number of years.
Since I am able to invest my SS income, I will be ahead on total SS income by age 66.
2007-09-14 09:00:53 · answer #3 · answered by regerugged 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
if you take it at 62, you get about 20% less per month than if you wait until full retirement, plus you won't have access to medicare until 65 - can you afford the risk of health expenses between 62 & 66? where you would have to pay full premium for health insurance
2007-09-14 09:05:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋