What's the best age for an American born in 58 to retire wrt SS?

[cmarshall]

3 hours ago, JimGant said:

Actually, the wife, a US citizen with 35 years employment there, has her own SS benefits. My example was a heads up for those with Thai wives not eligible for SS benefits. This scenario certainly *DOES* change the modeling for age 62 vs age 70 beginning years for SS. This is something peculiar to expat communities and not something I've seen discussed in mainstream articles about when to take SS benefits.

 

Should you see a model addressing this situation, please share.

I think you could model this situation with Esplanner using "contingency planning."  I am not sure if it will let you configure a wife who is not eligible for SS benefits on your earnings, but perhaps that could be modeled as a non-spouse household member.  You could send a question to the folks at esplanner.com.

 

Such a situation poses a special challenge, but I have never heard of any poster here who wants to sacrifice his long-term SS benefits just for the purpose of accumulating SS benefits to support his wife in the event of his early demise.

[gk10002000]

Take care to count all your income sources.  Dividends, Interest, IRA withdrawals or conversions, etc.  If you have traditional IRA monies, at some point you will have to withdraw them.  And you will have to do so starting when you hit the 701/2 year mark (Required Minimum Distributions).  Remember any income you get is added into your social security income and then you have to calculate how much of your social security benefit is taxed again.

 

   So if you have significant amount of Traditional IRA or company 401K monies, you have to decide when to take some of that now, while your income is low and you are not yet on social security so that when you do take social security your income will be low and you will get to keep all of your social security. 

 

  Then of course check what your total income will be so you will know what your medicare supp B premiums may be.  Keep below 85,000 and no issue as a benchmark.

[gk10002000]

60

17 hours ago, cmarshall said:

Most Americans cannot afford to delay SS benefits once they have stopped working.  This group has no choice to make.  A small number of Americans are financially capable of funding their retirement without SS benefits at all.  For this group, their choice to delay or not just doesn't matter.  There remains a relatively small number who can afford to delay for whom the decision may be important, but unfortunately most of them are constitutionally disinclined to delay gratification generally.  So, they will take benefits at 62 and feel good about it until sometime down the road when the survivors may begin to wish they had more income.

 

Only about 3% of recipients delay until age 70 including me.  I could afford to fund my lifestyle without lowering my standard of living between stopping work at 61 and collecting at 70.  By doing so I effectively "bought" more of the SS annuity (nearly double) that will last as long as I am alive, but also my younger wife, who is eligible for benefits on my SS earnings record.  By the way, it is only true that delayed benefits are actuarially neutral for unmarried recipients.  For those of us with a wife the Delayed Retirement Credits are far better than neutral.

 

I am delighted with my results so far, even at this early stage.  My age 62 benefit would have been around $1600, while my benefit this month was $3236.  

 

An annuity is the only financial asset that we cannot outlive and among annuities SS is far and away the best, because of COLAs and spousal, dependent, and survivor benefits, which are either expensive or not available at all with private annuities.  It is noteworthy that among the take-it-early advocates none of them mentions the unique, good-til-the-grave benefits of an annuity, as though they have failed somehow to grasp that this is the critical point.  But then we know from other studies that most people vastly overrate their own investment ability.

 

All of my friends and acquaintances who are well-educated with substantial investment assets, i.e. the financially sophisticated ones, have delayed or are delaying their SS benefits. 

 

The advice of most economists on the subject is: if you can afford to wait, wait.

Well written sir. I am 62 1/2 and have decent sized IRA and brokerage situation of over 1.1 million, currently invested for dividends and interest income and earning $65,000 a year.  I "retired" or more accurately quit my job with Northrop as I was vested in their 401k contributions and had enough.  I just took another contract engineering job in Clifton NJ, (ugh) because they threw such a high hourly rate at me and Per Diem I just couldn't say no.  Time will tell how long I stay on this contract.

 

   Anyway, since I have enough passive income to chill and relax, I definitely will not start SSA just yet.  My current benefit if I started today would be $2,058/month.  Not bad.  That will grow by about 7 % each year I hold off, give or take.  I have been lucky and able to put a fair amount into my IRAs.  I will be wanting to, at least the plan is to convert monies from my Traditional IRA over to my ROTH IRA in the years my income is low.  ROTH IRA monies are NOT counted towards MAGI which is used for social security taxation, Obamacare premiums, US Veteran Income benefits determination etc. 

 

  So this year or next, depending on when I really stop earning money and my income is low, I plan to be converting about $60,000 a year from my traditional IRA to my ROTH IRA.  Since that is a taxable event, the goal will be to keep total below $85,000 to keep my medicare Supp B premium at the minimum.  Apparently one can get that lowered if one does stop working instead of having the SSA base the premium on the last 2 year tax return income values.  But That is just a detail.  If this contract job gets fun, well, it is rarely bad to make more hay while the sun shines. Postponing fully being a bum and keeping one's mind active is not necessarily a bad thing

[cmarshall]

1 hour ago, gk10002000 said:

60

Well written sir. I am 62 1/2 and have decent sized IRA and brokerage situation of over 1.1 million, currently invested for dividends and interest income and earning $65,000 a year.  I "retired" or more accurately quit my job with Northrop as I was vested in their 401k contributions and had enough.  I just took another contract engineering job in Clifton NJ, (ugh) because they threw such a high hourly rate at me and Per Diem I just couldn't say no.  Time will tell how long I stay on this contract.

 

   Anyway, since I have enough passive income to chill and relax, I definitely will not start SSA just yet.  My current benefit if I started today would be $2,058/month.  Not bad.  That will grow by about 7 % each year I hold off, give or take.  I have been lucky and able to put a fair amount into my IRAs.  I will be wanting to, at least the plan is to convert monies from my Traditional IRA over to my ROTH IRA in the years my income is low.  ROTH IRA monies are NOT counted towards MAGI which is used for social security taxation, Obamacare premiums, US Veteran Income benefits determination etc. 

 

  So this year or next, depending on when I really stop earning money and my income is low, I plan to be converting about $60,000 a year from my traditional IRA to my ROTH IRA.  Since that is a taxable event, the goal will be to keep total below $85,000 to keep my medicare Supp B premium at the minimum.  Apparently one can get that lowered if one does stop working instead of having the SSA base the premium on the last 2 year tax return income values.  But That is just a detail.  If this contract job gets fun, well, it is rarely bad to make more hay while the sun shines. Postponing fully being a bum and keeping one's mind active is not necessarily a bad thing

Congratulations.  Sounds like you have it well in hand.  My plan was a lot like yours.  I stopped working at 61 and moved to Thailand.  Between 61 and 70 I did Roth conversions each year up to the top of my bracket.  I still have some in the TIRA, but since my wife is younger the RMDs are pretty low.  Since I was in Thailand during those years the Roth conversions were never subject to state income tax.

 

If you haven't already done so, it's a good idea to convert your old Northrop 401k to an IRA to avoid the likely higher 401k cost and to increase the investing options.

 

As an engineer you might enjoy doing some planning in Esplanner from esplanner.com.  It won't change your plans much since you have a good plan already, but it is interesting to test various scenarios to see the difference.  The expected lifetime gain from delaying SS is likely to be more than an improvement in investing.  I don't run Esplanner scenarios anymore, but I might if we were to consider relocating, for example.  I really appreciated Esplanner since it provides a panoramic view of your future financial life. 

 

I also like investing for income at this stage, since I want to assume only the minimum risk possible.  Depending on how high off the hog you prefer to live you should be able to sustain a reasonable lifestyle on just SS and investment income, leaving the principal for major changes or as a legacy.  That's a comfortable spot to be in.  If you like your work, continuing at it is a great option.  For me I was ready to go at 61.

 

Good luck with your plan.

[gk10002000]

41 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

Congratulations.  Sounds like you have it well in hand.  My plan was a lot like yours.  I stopped working at 61 and moved to Thailand.  Between 61 and 70 I did Roth conversions each year up to the top of my bracket.  I still have some in the TIRA, but since my wife is younger the RMDs are pretty low.  Since I was in Thailand during those years the Roth conversions were never subject to state income tax.

 

If you haven't already done so, it's a good idea to convert your old Northrop 401k to an IRA to avoid the likely higher 401k cost and to increase the investing options.

 

As an engineer you might enjoy doing some planning in Esplanner from esplanner.com.  It won't change your plans much since you have a good plan already, but it is interesting to test various scenarios to see the difference.  The expected lifetime gain from delaying SS is likely to be more than an improvement in investing.  I don't run Esplanner scenarios anymore, but I might if we were to consider relocating, for example.  I really appreciated Esplanner since it provides a panoramic view of your future financial life. 

 

I also like investing for income at this stage, since I want to assume only the minimum risk possible.  Depending on how high off the hog you prefer to live you should be able to sustain a reasonable lifestyle on just SS and investment income, leaving the principal for major changes or as a legacy.  That's a comfortable spot to be in.  If you like your work, continuing at it is a great option.  For me I was ready to go at 61.

 

Good luck with your plan.

Oh yes.  I always take my 401 k monies with me ASAP.  I left Northrop December 13.  I have already rolled over the Traditional and ROth components of that 401k into my own Traditional and Roth IRAs.  I had to wait one week for Northrop to update Fidelity that I had left.  Then stupid Fidelity mailed paper checks to me.  Then I had to mail them off to Etrade.  So primitive in this day and age.  I have rolled over 8 401k accounts in my days and all but one sent out paper checks.  They just hope you screw up or the checks get lost and they make money on the interest float or you miss the roll over deadlines and then get hit with tax bills

[JimGant]

3 hours ago, gk10002000 said:

Then of course check what your total income will be so you will know what your medicare supp B premiums may be.  Keep below 85,000 and no issue as a benchmark.

Finally, they've begun to index MAGI numbers. Tier one for singles will rise to $86,000 in 2020 ($172,000 for married).

https://www.investmentnews.com/article/20190916/BLOG05/190919940

[cmarshall]

39 minutes ago, gk10002000 said:

Oh yes.  I always take my 401 k monies with me ASAP.  I left Northrop December 13.  I have already rolled over the Traditional and ROth components of that 401k into my own Traditional and Roth IRAs.  I had to wait one week for Northrop to update Fidelity that I had left.  Then stupid Fidelity mailed paper checks to me.  Then I had to mail them off to Etrade.  So primitive in this day and age.  I have rolled over 8 401k accounts in my days and all but one sent out paper checks.  They just hope you screw up or the checks get lost and they make money on the interest float or you miss the roll over deadlines and then get hit with tax bills

Fidelity is no end of annoying.  I called to make the RMDS for a couple of small Keogh accounts I still have with Fido.  CR said a signed paper form is required.  "But I live in Bangkok, Thailand," I said.  "Would I be coming to the US anytime soon," she asked.  I couldn't believe she could be that stupid.  I had to DHL the signed form to them.  For some reason Fido loves paper.

[HuskerDo]

23 hours ago, cmarshall said:

Fidelity is no end of annoying.  I called to make the RMDS for a couple of small Keogh accounts I still have with Fido.  CR said a signed paper form is required.  "But I live in Bangkok, Thailand," I said.  "Would I be coming to the US anytime soon," she asked.  I couldn't believe she could be that stupid.  I had to DHL the signed form to them.  For some reason Fido loves paper.

Don't blame them. They have rules in place to protect folks like you.  You should have checked into this sort of thing before moving. It's mostly your fault that you are so irritated by Fidelity's rules as you should have known them. If they are so annoying why did you have your money with them? Just another complaining ex-pat. Far too many of them already.

[cmarshall]

39 minutes ago, HuskerDo said:

Don't blame them. They have rules in place to protect folks like you.  You should have checked into this sort of thing before moving. It's mostly your fault that you are so irritated by Fidelity's rules as you should have known them. If they are so annoying why did you have your money with them? Just another complaining ex-pat. Far too many of them already.

I have and have had accounts at other brokerages none of whom require paper to take an RMD distribution nowadays.  It's even worse than I described actually.  They require a notarized signature on certain documents, but specifically exclude both foreign notaries (no objection there), but they also explicitly exclude notarization by a US Consulate.  So, the effect is to execute such a transaction I would have to return to the US.  That is beyond unreasonable and Fidelity's motivation is to protect themselves at all costs even to the point of denying legitimate service to their clients.

 

I have had the account with Fidelity for more than forty years.  I would close the account, but doing so would require that notarization within the territorial US.  Actually, of course, the US Consulate in Bangkok is the territory of the US and I reminded the manager that the US State Dept issues passports.  At the moment I have an oral agreement from that manager to make an exception and accept the Consulate's notary in this case.  We'll see how that plays out.

 

I am quite happy with all the other US financial banks and brokers with whom I deal.  Is there something about having moved abroad that disqualifies you from criticizing any policy of any US financial institution?  If so, I missed that memo.

[HuskerDo]

16 hours ago, cmarshall said:

I have and have had accounts at other brokerages none of whom require paper to take an RMD distribution nowadays.  It's even worse than I described actually.  They require a notarized signature on certain documents, but specifically exclude both foreign notaries (no objection there), but they also explicitly exclude notarization by a US Consulate.  So, the effect is to execute such a transaction I would have to return to the US.  That is beyond unreasonable and Fidelity's motivation is to protect themselves at all costs even to the point of denying legitimate service to their clients.

 

I have had the account with Fidelity for more than forty years.  I would close the account, but doing so would require that notarization within the territorial US.  Actually, of course, the US Consulate in Bangkok is the territory of the US and I reminded the manager that the US State Dept issues passports.  At the moment I have an oral agreement from that manager to make an exception and accept the Consulate's notary in this case.  We'll see how that plays out.

 

I am quite happy with all the other US financial banks and brokers with whom I deal.  Is there something about having moved abroad that disqualifies you from criticizing any policy of any US financial institution?  If so, I missed that memo.

That sounds like a lot of work but Trump changed the rules related to RMD. You aren't required to take it until age 72 now. I'll assume you are older than that.

 

Good luck working thru the mess. I'm glad I don't have to deal with Fidelity but ultimately they are trying to protect you from fraud so you have to appreciate that part of it.

[gk10002000]

17 hours ago, cmarshall said:

I have and have had accounts at other brokerages none of whom require paper to take an RMD distribution nowadays.  It's even worse than I described actually.  They require a notarized signature on certain documents, but specifically exclude both foreign notaries (no objection there), but they also explicitly exclude notarization by a US Consulate.  So, the effect is to execute such a transaction I would have to return to the US.  That is beyond unreasonable and Fidelity's motivation is to protect themselves at all costs even to the point of denying legitimate service to their clients.

 

I have had the account with Fidelity for more than forty years.  I would close the account, but doing so would require that notarization within the territorial US.  Actually, of course, the US Consulate in Bangkok is the territory of the US and I reminded the manager that the US State Dept issues passports.  At the moment I have an oral agreement from that manager to make an exception and accept the Consulate's notary in this case.  We'll see how that plays out.

 

I am quite happy with all the other US financial banks and brokers with whom I deal.  Is there something about having moved abroad that disqualifies you from criticizing any policy of any US financial institution?  If so, I missed that memo.

I had Fidelity for this 401k because Northrop Grumman used Fidelity.  I had no choice there!  They actually did process the 401k roll over out checks fairly quickly but still it was paper mail.  Of course the fidelity guy tried to sales pitch me, keep money there, open IRAs etc.  It was all I could to politely dismiss the kid.  Didn't even want to go into the bad things I have heard about Fidelity and Vanguard for off shore USA expats. My contract agency here now uses Wells Fargo and I have been with this agency several times befor and each time when I left the jobs I got the money out fairly quickly.  They nicely have both a pre tax (traditional) and post tax (Roth) component in their 401k.  Being 62 I can plow in $26,000 this year.  And that won't take long to do.  Unless this job turns out to be really really fun and I like being near New York City (working in Clifton, NJ), (I don't) July looks like the target out date.  Then several months of holiday.  Maybe next year take work again just to keep mind active

 

My broker is Etrade and it is pretty simple for RMD or other types of withdrawals, or for Traditional IRA to ROTH IRA conversions.  You log on, select the amounts, select more or less how much federal withholding you want taken out and what account to put the money in.  You can apparently even set up recurring RMD withdrawals.  I have not gone through the RMD, but I did dry run the Convert from Traditional to Roth process. 

 

"How to get started
Complete the online IRA Distribution Request form at etrade.com/onlinedistribution. We can calculate the RMD and:
Send the required distribution via check, wire, or ACH; or
Transfer the funds to a linked E*TRADE brokerage or bank account; or
Set up recurring payments to automatically distribute the RMD every year on the date the investor chooses

[cmarshall]

7 hours ago, gk10002000 said:

My contract agency here now uses Wells Fargo and I have been with this agency several times befor and each time when I left the jobs I got the money out fairly quickly.  

Yikes!  The nice folks at Wells Fargo are the ones who fraudulently set up millions of additional savings and checking accounts for their banking customers without their consent and then socked them with punitive fees.

[gk10002000]

7 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

Yikes!  The nice folks at Wells Fargo are the ones who fraudulently set up millions of additional savings and checking accounts for their banking customers without their consent and then socked them with punitive fees.

Yeah.  I never chose them but this agency uses them for the company 401k.  The only reason I even have my own wells fargo checking account and a tertiary backup credit card with them is because they bought up wachovia many years ago where I did have an account.  And since my primary bank and brokerage is Etrade, which basically has no offices or branches, having a brick and mortar bank such as Wells Fargo which is in just about every state, has come in handy.  Every now and then I have to deposit cash from some Slot machine Jackpots so WFC comes in handy.  But as far as using them for anything large or important.. never.  A disgusting company.

[cmarshall]

8 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

That sounds like a lot of work but Trump changed the rules related to RMD. You aren't required to take it until age 72 now. I'll assume you are older than that.

Anyone who reached age 70.5 in 2019 is covered by the old rules, not the changes in the SECURE Act .

[Tounge Thaied]

It's different for everyone. Your particulars are required to answer your question. 

You have to weigh what your amounts will be at 62, 67 and 70. Factors such as other income sources and tax implications play a big factor. here are two great links to calculators that give you a look at different scenarios to see how you should proceed. The first requires you to sign up for an online account where you will be able to view your amounts, secondly a calculator for the previously mentioned scenarios. 

https://www.ssa.gov/myaccount/create.html

https://www.fool.com/retirement/2016/06/06/social-security-tax-calculator-are-your-retirement.aspx

[WalkingOrders]

I am born in 58 and I am going to collect mine at age 62. If I invest for a few years it tilts even more in my favor. Motley fool has numbers similiar

 Better off at 62

I agree

 

[gk10002000]

On 1/26/2020 at 2:43 AM, WalkingOrders said:

I am born in 58 and I am going to collect mine at age 62. If I invest for a few years it tilts even more in my favor. Motley fool has numbers similiar

 Better off at 62

I agree

 

Nothing inherently wrong with doing that.  The actuarial statistics are a guessing game as to how much one will collect in total, versus how long one will live.  If you don't have many other income sources that make income taxes much of an issue, then nothing wrong with keeping things simple.   I was born in 57 and since I am still working (for now anyway) and I have investment income, it is a bit better for me to wait a little bit and let the yearly benefit increase by about 7% a year.  That and since I want to convert monies from my traditional IRA to my ROTH IRA and keep my income low, pretty much means I will wait a few more years. 

 

Good luck and enjoy

[Jingthing]

Personally I think if you don't need the money that it's foolish to take it early because as much as people might hope, it's hard to imagine a GUARANTEED annual return as high as S.S. gives you for waiting. That said, in my case, whether I needed it or not was a grey area, so I went with an early claim. But it was a hard decision. I have already had cause to have some regrets as I'm shopping around for Plan B expat retirement destinations other than Thailand and generally they are pension based only. So by taking an early claim I'm locked into a lower pension than I would have had by waiting which could mean I'll be locked out of pension eligibility for countries that I would want to move to. (Where by waiting I may have had an increase to stay within eligibility.) That's something I didn't consider in my decision and it's now too late, so that might not apply to most people, but just sharing it in case it may apply to others.

Edited January 28, 2020 by Jingthing

[Tounge Thaied]

11 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Personally I think if you don't need the money that it's foolish to take it early because as much as people might hope, it's hard to imagine a GUARANTEED annual return as high as S.S. gives you for waiting. That said, in my case, whether I needed it or not was a grey area, so I went with an early claim. But it was a hard decision. I have already had cause to have some regrets as I'm shopping around for Plan B expat retirement destinations other than Thailand and generally they are pension based only. So by taking an early claim I'm locked into a lower pension than I would have had by waiting which could mean I'll be locked out of pension eligibility for countries that I would want to move to. (Where by waiting I may have had an increase to stay within eligibility.) That's something I didn't consider in my decision and it's now too late, so that might not apply to most people, but just sharing it in case it may apply to others.

There is no ROI for taking SS early that can match what you will get for waiting. In my case it is a $600.00 difference between 62 and 67 and $500.00 per month difference from 67 to 70. If there is anyone who can get a higher rate of return on your SS money by taking it 5 or 8 years early, I would love to see it. 

[Jingthing]

The key Is the GUARANTEED high rate of return by waiting. Obviously many people get better returns on investments by taking risks, but taking such risks can also mean no return or even large losses. It really is objectively a good deal to wait so taking an early claim shouldn't be done without a lot of thought.

[gk10002000]

2 hours ago, Tounge Thaied said:

There is no ROI for taking SS early that can match what you will get for waiting. In my case it is a $600.00 difference between 62 and 67 and $500.00 per month difference from 67 to 70. If there is anyone who can get a higher rate of return on your SS money by taking it 5 or 8 years early, I would love to see it. 

SSA benefits increase over 7% each year that you wait.  I am 62 3/4.   Below is my current benefit by year should I take it, along with the future estimates.  I assumed no earned income for every year going forward.  I also plugged in some future income numbers up to even 100,000 a year and it made little difference in the future benefit amounts except for many years down the road, none of which I will likely to be working, i.e. > 65.  The benefits are strongly only related to the number of years you wait and not how much money you earn in those waiting years.    The SSA retirement benefit estimator is really easy to use.  You don't log onto the SSA website but you do enter your personal information like, name, Social, Mother's maiden last name etc.  The estimator then pulls the proper data.  

 

https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement/estimator.html      Then click on the "estimate your retirement benefits"  button

 

     One thing to consider is,  30,000 SSA benefit might be considered equivalent to having a 600,000 investment earning 5%.  600,000x.05 = 30,000 per year.  Do you have 600k invested earning better than 5 or 7%?    So the "sweet spot" as they say depends on you.  Do you need the money now?  How much do you want to trade off the years you have left and can you financially make such tradeoffs?

 

		INCOME	MO	YEAR	DELTA/YR
63		0	2090	25080
64		0	2247	26964	1884
65		0	2427	29124	2160
66		0	2607	31284	2160
67		0	2732	32784	1500
68		0	2948	35376	2592
69		0	3164	37968	2592
70		0	3452	41424	3456

[meechai]

On 1/28/2020 at 4:52 AM, Tounge Thaied said:

There is no ROI for taking SS early that can match what you will get for waiting. In my case it is a $600.00 difference between 62 and 67 and $500.00 per month difference from 67 to 70. If there is anyone who can get a higher rate of return on your SS money by taking it 5 or 8 years early, I would love to see it. 

Perhaps & of course depends on each investment but...............

 

To be fair & compare just the SS...no investments

you for instance claim you will get $600 more per month if you wait till 67 instead of collecting at 62 ok...

 

Example

Person A takes the $1000 per month at 62 = $60,000 at 67 already collected (Used 1k to make it simple example)

Person B (you) take the $600 more $1600 at 67

 

 

Person A has collected $60,000 before you started so to be fair he is ahead by that alone not even counting any investments (because they are not guaranteed)

 

So to be fair Person B (you) do not even match what Person A already received till your 70 years old

($60,000/$1600= 37.5months payments / 3 years 1.5months) 

 

Edited January 29, 2020 by meechai

[gk10002000]

see my post about the SECURE retirement act.  The RMD age has increased, which is of interest and important to some. 

[cmarshall]

All true, but let's not overlook the most important point: your SS benefits will last for your whole life.  No portfolio is guaranteed to last until you die.

[Jingthing]

OK, this is controversial, but there is always the question of looking at expected life expectancy in the decision process of when to file a S.S. claim.

 

Some advisors say don't do that, you never really know.

Well yeah generally you don't, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't consider it at all.

 

So the S.S. break even ages are based on life expectancies in the U.S. (which of course are higher for women). 

 

But wait a minute.

 

Many of us are expats living in Thailand.

 

So do we really fit under U.S. life expectancies or living in Thailand do we fit better under Thailand life expectancies.

 

Surprise, surprise. They're much lower in Thailand.

 

Also, here's another wrinkle. I recently read an article (sorry didn't save the link) saying that lower income Americans have a significantly lower life expectancy than wealthier ones. Something like 8 years lower. 

 

If you're seriously considering an early claim, most likely you're in the lower income group.

 

Just saying.

Quote

According to the latest WHO data published in 2018 life expectancy in Thailand is: Male 71.8, female 79.3 and total life expectancy is 75.5 which gives Thailand a World Life Expectancy ranking of 69.

https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/thailand-life-expectancy

[gk10002000]

On 1/27/2020 at 9:52 PM, Jingthing said:

Personally I think if you don't need the money that it's foolish to take it early because as much as people might hope, it's hard to imagine a GUARANTEED annual return as high as S.S. gives you for waiting. That said, in my case, whether I needed it or not was a grey area, so I went with an early claim. But it was a hard decision. I have already had cause to have some regrets as I'm shopping around for Plan B expat retirement destinations other than Thailand and generally they are pension based only. So by taking an early claim I'm locked into a lower pension than I would have had by waiting which could mean I'll be locked out of pension eligibility for countries that I would want to move to. (Where by waiting I may have had an increase to stay within eligibility.) That's something I didn't consider in my decision and it's now too late, so that might not apply to most people, but just sharing it in case it may apply to others.

Yes, the "pension" angle is something to consider.  My goal starting in 2004 after my first trip to Thailand was to get passive income up to 65K.  I did it by my investments.  It took longer than I thought since the Baht to USD dropped from 44 down to the 30 range and kind of outpaced my investment increases!   But I got there.  Now my Social security if I took it today is right at 26,000/year is literally right at the 65 K number.  Not much maneuvering room for future baht decreases against minor yearly cost of living social security increases.  And as you wrote, some countries and institutions really are pension or some sort of organized payout focused.

[rastlin]

If you don't absolutely need the money, wait as long as possible, until age 70 if you can.

[JAFO]

On 1/14/2020 at 3:15 PM, HuskerDo said:

Besides you'll be spending a LOT less at age 85 and thereafter. Pretty much hanging out at home (or at the retirement center). Little to no travel. Fewer meals out. Adult diapers, oatmeal and prune juice aren't all that expensive

And that really is the crux of it. What will you being doing at 85; Running marathons, skydiving, traveling regularly, driving on long road trips, hiking etc. Nope. A great majority will likely be sitting at home with varying ailments watching TV or reading. Its just life, can't stop the aging process 

 

I have done the math with numerous scenarios. I will be taking mine when I get to 62 ( still 2+ yrs away ). It will supplement my other income from my IRA etc. When I moved to Thailand for work years back and decided to move here permanently, I built a financial model around 50k baht a month COL. Why, well simple. I wanted to know that if anything should go completely upside down that my wife and I could comfortably live on that which is less than what my SS benefits will pay out. We have zero debt (house, cars, toys paid in full and here no property tax).  So other than basic living costs, which at bare bone minimum at roughly 15k baht a month, the rest is upside.

 

Reality is the expectations you have now will change as we age. I would prefer to stay very active, do the things I want now while I am still in great shape and healthy. Saving it or waiting until later has diminishing return. My parents and their friends waited and waited. They finally took it and then they did very little. Quite sad really. 

 

Now that said, If I was still living in the states I am not sure what my point of view would be on this discussion. Clearly I could not live in the states on $1500 a month and I would have much larger cash burn. 

 

 

[meechai]

On 2/1/2020 at 4:06 PM, JAFO said:

Now that said, If I was still living in the states I am not sure what my point of view would be on this discussion. Clearly I could not live in the states on $1500 a month and I would have much larger cash burn. 

 

Depends.......If home base is safe not a problem for most

 

Meaning if by the time your 62 you have no bills no mortgage etc then life is really not very expensive at all.

 

Well I guess it still can be if your the type that likes to spend/party but then again if that were true your not the type that

had everything paid in full by 62 anyway ????

[JAFO]

3 hours ago, meechai said:

Depends.......If home base is safe not a problem for most

 

Meaning if by the time your 62 you have no bills no mortgage etc then life is really not very expensive at all.

 

Well I guess it still can be if your the type that likes to spend/party but then again if that were true your not the type that

had everything paid in full by 62 anyway ????

Absolutely. A significant impact to funds required or needed depends on your lifestyle, expectations and activity level.

 

Clearly at this juncture in my life living in that states would be cost prohibitive primarily as I am extremely active and most everything one wants to do can be quite costly.  

 

Additionally location in the states would be a big driver on COL as well. I shed all assets and debt in the US and have none here. Life is quite relaxing here.