I ran my numbers as if taking SS each year from 62 to 67. The only thing I could discern was that taking it at 64 had the break-even point with age 62 occurred a little earlier than the other years. I just checked whole years, so I didn't test the 67 and 7 months. Oh, I just realized a flaw in my analysis. I forgot to inflate each benefit starting point. I don't think it will change the analysis much, other than having break-even points occurring earlier. I re-ran my numbers with an inflation equalizer and there there is an advantage to taking SS at age 64 over age 62. For me, taking SS at age 64 had the break-even point somewhere between age 73 and 74. For other years, break-even happened between ages 74 and 77. I don't see any advantage to taking it past age 67 and 7 months with my simple comparison.In my original plan, I was taking SS at age 62. Now I'll at least explore taking it at age 64. The likely scenario I'll end up taking will depend on how my investments are doing at age 61 and each year following to age 64. There's a good chance I'll make it past age 74 so we'll benefit by waiting.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra