I'm in a very similar situation - turning 67 in October 2025 and still working full-time. After reading through all these responses, I want to share what I learned from my own research that might help clarify things further. The key insight is that SSA uses what's called the "earnings test exempt amount" which is different for the year you reach FRA versus other years. For 2024, the regular annual limit was $22,320, but the special higher limit for your FRA year was $59,520. The 2025 amounts should be announced in October, but they'll likely be around $62,760 as others mentioned. What really helped me understand this was looking at SSA Publication 05-10069 "How Work Affects Your Benefits" - it has clear examples of exactly how they calculate this for people in our situation. One thing I'd add is to keep detailed records of your monthly earnings throughout 2025, especially if you have any irregular income like bonuses or overtime. This will make it much easier to provide accurate information to SSA and avoid any confusion later.

One additional consideration that might be helpful for your planning - since you're making $85,000 annually and turning 67 in September, you should also think about the tax implications of when you start your benefits. Starting benefits in September versus January could affect your tax liability for 2025, especially since you'll have both earned income and Social Security benefits in the same year. Up to 85% of your Social Security benefits could be taxable depending on your "combined income" (adjusted gross income + nontaxable interest + half of SS benefits). With your salary level, you'll likely hit the higher taxation threshold. You might want to run some tax projections for both scenarios - starting benefits in January versus September - to see which timing works better for your overall financial situation. Sometimes the earnings test considerations are just one piece of the puzzle, and the tax impact can be significant enough to influence your decision even when you're under the earnings limits.

I'm brand new to this community and just discovered this rounding policy through your post - I had absolutely no idea this was happening! Just checked my own Social Security statement and they rounded down 67 cents from my monthly payment. That's over $8 a year they're keeping from me that I never even knew about! What really bothers me is how hidden this policy seems to be. During my entire application process last year, not once did anyone from Social Security mention that they would be rounding down my benefits every month. It feels like they're deliberately hoping people won't notice or question it. The fact that this has been going on since 1939 but we can now calculate everything to the exact penny in the digital age makes this policy seem completely outdated. My credit card company can charge me exactly $23.47 for a purchase, but somehow the government can't pay me my exact benefit amount? It's clearly a choice to keep this old policy because it saves them money at our expense. Thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention - reading through all these comments shows how many of us were completely unaware this was happening. I'm definitely going to contact my representatives about updating this policy. People deserve to know about these "hidden" policies that affect their benefits!

I'm completely new to this community and just discovered this rounding policy through your post - I had absolutely no idea this was happening! Just looked at my own Social Security statement and they rounded down 54 cents from my monthly payment. That's about $6.50 a year they're keeping that I never even knew about! What really frustrates me is how this information seems to be deliberately hidden from beneficiaries. When I applied for benefits eight months ago, there were stacks of paperwork and multiple appointments, but nobody ever said "By the way, we're going to round down your payment every month and keep the difference because of a law from 1939." It feels like they're counting on people not noticing or just accepting it. The technology excuse is what really gets me - we're in 2025 and I can send someone exactly $15.73 through digital payment apps instantly, but somehow the federal government claims they can't pay Social Security benefits to the exact cent? It's obviously not a technical limitation, it's a policy choice that benefits them financially at our expense. Reading through all these comments and seeing how many people are discovering this for the first time really highlights how little transparency there is around these policies. Thanks for bringing this important issue to light! I'm definitely going to share this information with other people I know who receive benefits and contact my representatives about updating this outdated policy. Even if we're talking about cents per person, the principle matters - we should receive every penny of the benefits we've earned.

As a newcomer to this community, I want to express my gratitude for this incredibly thorough and reassuring discussion! I'm 62 and have been wrestling with this exact question about post-60 earnings and Social Security for weeks now. Like so many others here, I completely misunderstood how the indexing system works and was genuinely worried that my higher current earnings (around $55,000 after years of much lower wages) were somehow being "discounted" because they aren't indexed. Reading through everyone's real experiences has been such a relief! The key insight that helped me was understanding that indexing is designed to help your OLDER earnings compete fairly with your NEWER earnings by adjusting for inflation, not to penalize current work. When your current salary is genuinely higher than what you earned decades ago (even after that inflation adjustment), those current earnings still win and boost your benefit calculation. I immediately followed everyone's advice and created my ssa.gov account, and what an eye-opener! I can clearly see that my current earnings will replace several very low years from when I was working minimal hours. The 35-year calculation really does favor people with variable work histories when they have higher earnings later in their careers. This community has provided such valuable real-world evidence that working past 60 with higher earnings is beneficial, not harmful, for Social Security purposes. Thank you to everyone who shared their experiences - you've helped me make a much more confident decision about continuing to work rather than filing for early benefits!

As a newcomer to this community, I want to add my heartfelt thanks for this incredibly informative discussion! I'm 59 and recently got promoted to a position that will put me at around $70,000 starting next year - my highest salary ever after decades of lower-paying work. I had been losing sleep over whether accepting this promotion would somehow hurt my Social Security benefits because of the indexing cutoff at 60. I was even considering turning it down! But reading through all these real-world experiences has completely transformed my understanding. The breakthrough moment for me was realizing that the indexing system is actually designed to be FAIR - it gives your older earnings a chance to compete with modern wages by adjusting for inflation, but if you're genuinely earning more now than you did back then (even after that adjustment), your current work still provides the greater benefit. What really sealed it for me was seeing how many people here have tracked their actual benefit estimates on ssa.gov and watched them increase month by month as they continued working past 60 with higher salaries. That's concrete proof that the system works exactly as described. I'm definitely accepting this promotion and will be setting up my ssa.gov account this week to monitor how my estimated benefits change. This community has probably saved me from making a terrible career mistake based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how Social Security actually works. Thank you all for sharing your knowledge and experiences!

I just wanted to chime in as someone who was also confused by this change! I received my 2024 SSA-1099 last week and panicked when I saw the 'A' next to my Social Security number. I thought there might be an error or that someone had tampered with my benefits. It's such a relief to read everyone's experiences and the official confirmation from SSA representatives. I really wish they had sent out a simple notice explaining these new letter codes when they implemented the system - would have saved so many of us from unnecessary worry! Thanks to everyone who took the time to call SSA and share what they learned.

I'm so glad I found this thread! I just received my 2024 SSA-1099 form yesterday and immediately noticed the 'A' next to my Social Security number. As someone who's been receiving benefits for only about 8 months now, I had no idea what it meant and was worried it indicated some kind of problem with my account. Reading through everyone's experiences and the official confirmation from SSA representatives has been incredibly reassuring. It's clear this is just part of their internal system modernization and nothing to be concerned about. I really appreciate how helpful this community is for newcomers like me who are still learning to navigate all these Social Security processes. Thank you all for sharing your knowledge and taking the time to get official answers!

I've been on SSDI for about 8 months now and this thread has been incredibly helpful! I was actually in a very similar situation recently when my transmission went out and I needed to find a replacement vehicle. Reading through everyone's experiences really clarifies that SSDI doesn't have the same asset restrictions as SSI. What gave me the most confidence was learning that insurance settlements for property damage are specifically not counted as income by SSA. Your situation sounds very straightforward - you're using compensation from your damaged car to purchase a replacement, which is exactly what that settlement was intended for. I ended up keeping a simple folder with my insurance paperwork, purchase receipt, and a brief note connecting the two, just like several people mentioned. While I never needed to show it to anyone, having everything organized gave me peace of mind during what was already a stressful car shopping process. That Honda Civic sounds like a perfect choice for reliable transportation! From everything I've learned through this community and my own experience, you should be able to move forward with confidence. The consensus is clear - SSDI recipients can purchase necessary vehicles without reporting requirements or benefit concerns.

I'm new to SSDI (just started receiving benefits about 3 months ago) and this entire thread has been incredibly educational for me! I had no idea about the difference between SSDI and SSI asset rules before reading everyone's responses. Like many others here, I've been putting off some necessary purchases because I was so confused about what might affect my benefits. My laptop completely died last month and I've been hesitating to replace it, but reading through all these experiences with car purchases is helping me understand that SSDI really doesn't have those asset restrictions. @Abigail, your insurance settlement situation sounds very straightforward based on all the expert advice here. It's so smart that you asked the community before making the purchase - I wish I had found this place sooner when I was stressing about my laptop replacement! The documentation tips everyone has shared are invaluable. Even though we don't have reporting requirements for purchases, keeping organized records just makes sense when dealing with any government benefits. I'm definitely going to start implementing that practice going forward. Thanks to everyone who shared their real experiences and knowledge. This community is such a great resource for newcomers like me who are still learning to navigate the SSDI system!