Social Security at 62 while earning $23k - can I contribute $10k to 401k without benefit repayment?

Good planning on your part! Yes, pre-tax 401k contributions DO reduce your countable income for the Social Security earnings test. The earnings test only looks at your gross wages AFTER pre-tax retirement contributions. So if you earn $23,000 and put $10,000 in your 401k, SSA would only count $13,000 toward the earnings limit (which is $22,320 in 2025 for those under FRA).As for your strategy to suspend at FRA, work to replace lower earning years, then restart at 70 - that's solid. However, it won't get you back to 80% of your FRA amount. When you claim at 62, you take a 30% permanent reduction from your FRA amount. The 8% per year delayed retirement credits from 67-70 will increase that reduced amount by 24% total, but it's applied to your already reduced benefit.Run the math through the SSA calculator on their website to see precise numbers for your situation.

Thank you so much for this explanation! That's a huge relief about the 401k contributions not counting. So essentially I could earn up to $32,320 gross ($22,320 limit + $10k in 401k) without triggering benefit repayments? That gives me more flexibility.On the second part though - I'm a bit confused. I thought suspending at FRA would somehow reset things, but it sounds like the 30% reduction at 62 is permanent no matter what? Even with the delayed credits from 67-70?

Saw ur post and wanted to say careful! My uncle tried something like this and SSA counted ALL his income for the earnings test. Maybe different 401ks have different rules?? Not sure but just be careful

Your uncle's situation was likely different. To clarify: traditional pre-tax 401k contributions are excluded from the earnings test calculation. However, Roth 401k contributions ARE counted because they're post-tax. Also, if your uncle was self-employed, SSA has different rules for counting net earnings. This is why it's always good to verify your specific situation with SSA directly.

THE SSA SYSTEM IS DESIGNED TO PENALIZE EARLY FILERS!!! I did exactly what you're planning - filed at 62, then suspended at FRA thinking I'd gain back what I lost. BIG MISTAKE! The reduction is PERMANENT like the other person said. The 24% increase from delaying to 70 sounds good but it's on the ALREADY REDUCED amount. The math works out that you'll never catch up to what you would have gotten by just waiting until 70 to file in the first place.The system is rigged against those of us who NEED to start early. It's a lifetime penalty with NO WAY OUT!!!

i think ur being a little dramatic lol its not

I was in almost your exact situation last year. Let me explain what happened:First, yes, 401k pre-tax contributions DON'T count toward earnings test. I made $29k but contributed $11k to my 401k, so only $18k counted toward the limit. No repayment needed.About your long-term strategy - suspending at FRA and restarting at 70 DOES help, but not as much as you might hope. When I ran my numbers, starting at 62 put me at about 70% of my FRA amount. After suspending at FRA and restarting at 70, I ended up with about 87% of what my original FRA amount would have been.The working part to replace zero years definitely helps though! Each higher earning year can boost your benefit a bit more.

Thanks for sharing your experience! 87% of FRA amount sounds better than what I was calculating. How complicated was the suspension process when you reached FRA? Did you just call them or need to visit an office?

Good luck calling SSA to ask about all this! I've been trying for THREE WEEKS to get someone on the phone to answer questions about my benefits. Endless busy signals, disconnects, and

I had the same problem last month trying to get info about my disability review. After wasting days, I tried this service called Claimyr (claimyr.com) that got me through to an agent in about 25 minutes instead of waiting on hold for hours. They have a video showing how it works: https://youtu.be/Z-BRbJw3puUWorth it to actually get answers to complex questions like yours where the website doesn't help.

Thanks I'll check it out! Did they ask for any personal info to use it? My cousin told me about something similar but they wanted her SSN which seemed sketchy

wait so ur gonna work till 70??? why even bother with SS at 62 then? im confused why not just wait?

I need some income now for medical expenses (didn't mention that in my post), but I'll only be working part-time until FRA. The plan is to start benefits at 62, suspend at 67, work more between 67-70 to replace some low-earning years in my record, then restart at 70. Not working continuously from 62-70.

I'm going through something similar!! Started drawing early at 63 last year cause I had to. One thing nobody mentioned yet - when you suspend at FRA, you CAN'T get retroactive benefits for that suspension period if you change your mind. So be ABSOLUTELY SURE you can live without that SS money during your suspension period. I had to un-suspend after 4 months because my part-time job cut my hours, and I couldn't get back any of those missed payments. Just something to think about with your planning.

That's really good to know - thank you! I'm expecting some inheritance around that time that should help cover expenses during the suspension period, but I'll make sure to have a backup plan in case that falls through.

To answer your earlier question - the 30% reduction from filing at 62 is indeed permanent. Suspending doesn't erase that. Here's how the math works:1. Let's say your FRA benefit would be $2,000/month2. Filing at 62 reduces it by 30% to $1,400/month3. Suspending at FRA doesn't change that $1,400 base4. Delaying from 67-70 adds 24% (8% per year for 3 years)5. 24% of $1,400 is $3366. So at 70, you'd get $1,400 + $336 = $1,7367. That's about 87% of your original $2,000 FRA amountSo yes, you'll get more than your reduced age-62 amount, but never as much as if you'd waited until 70 to file initially (which would be 124% of your FRA amount, or $2,480 in this example).

Thank you for breaking down the math like this - it's super helpful to see the actual numbers. I still think this approach makes sense for my situation since I need some income now, but at least I understand exactly what trade-offs I'm making.

my two cents - make sure ur talking bout a traditional 401k not a roth 401k. roth contributions still count as earnings for the test. made that mistake myself 🤦‍♂️