66 is magic number for retirement age

But Medicare is also a key factor, study shows

Jun 2, 2013 @ 12:01 am

By Darla Mercado

Sixty-six is the magic retirement age for those seeking full Social Security eligibility, but Medicare eligibility appears to be a considerable factor for those who decide to stop working at 65.

That was the conclusion of a study published by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College. The institute released a research brief last Tuesday titled “How Important is Medicare Eligibility in the Timing of Retirement?”

The study examined 3,717 individuals who were still employed at 64 and some who had observable work histories up to 66. Of those participants, 2,109 were eligible for full Social Security benefits at 65 and 1,608 had a higher full retirement age.

PARTICIPANTS' BEHAVIOR

Researchers studied participants' behavior and examined a number of factors, including pension coverage, financial planning horizons and how health care coverage during retirement affects the likelihood of retirement.

The CRR found that workers who didn't have retiree health care coverage were 6.5 percentage points more likely to retiree during the month they turned 65 than those with retiree health care coverage through their employer.

Ultimately, the study predicted that 13% of the participating workers who had employee health care coverage but no retiree coverage would retire at 65, compared with 9.8% of those who had neither employee nor retiree health insurance.

Meanwhile, 7.7% of those who had both retiree and employee coverage were likely to retire at 65.

Research brief author and CRR research economist Matthew S. Rutledge noted that other factors contributed to why someone might decide to retire at 65 instead of waiting, but these factors were negligible.

For instance, some defined- benefit pension plans consider 65 to be the retirement age, though some people might not realize that the eligibility age for Social Security isn't 65. It was raised to 66 in 2008.

However, Mr. Rutledge noted that more people might be able to retire at 65 — or even earlier — depending on how effectively the Affordable Care Act is implemented.

Next year, as part of President Barack Obama's health care reform act, states are expected to have health insurance exchange programs up and running.

“It depends on whether the exchanges will be able to replace or phase out employer-sponsored insurance. If it's implemented well and the exchanges are good substitutes for what you can get through your employer, then you will see others retire a little earlier,” Mr. Rutledge said.

“We think those people who are just holding on for the insurance coverage might leave their employer if they can find adequate coverage elsewhere,” he said.

0
Comments

What do you think?

View comments

Recommended for you

Featured video

INTV

Proposal to delay the DOL fiduciary rule is a turning point

Senior reporter Mark Schoeff Jr. and managing editor Christina Nelson discuss the Labor Department's latest move and what it means for the future of the regulation and the firms preparing for it.

Latest news & opinion

Cetera broker-dealers to pay back $3.3 million to clients overcharged for mutual funds

Over an eight-year period, the B-Ds failed to properly supervise sales charge waivers to clients in retirement plans and charitable organizations.

Fiduciary advocates press CFP Board for specifics on standards changes

Meanwhile, few brokerages and their trade associations, which blasted the DOL's fiduciary rule in comment letters, are responding to the CFP Board's proposal.

Big gains attract new money to emerging markets, but should investors stay?

An estimated $6.7 billion has flowed into emerging-market stock funds and ETFs so far this year, according to Morningstar.

Attorney blasts Finra after regulator loses insider trading case

Lawyer says it was 'slimy' of Finra to publicize the case while it was still being litigated.

Will Jeffrey Gundlach's Trump-like approach on Twitter work in financial services?

The DoubleLine CEO's attacks on Wall Street Journal reporters is igniting a discussion on what's fair game on social media.

X

Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print