Claiming Social Security at 62 Why More Retirees Are Doing It and Why They’re Not
The standard Social Security advice is becoming almost automatic: Delay benefits until 70 and collect the largest possible monthly check. For many retirees particularly healthy higher earners in married households that can be an excellent strategy. It is not a universal rule.
Social Security allows retirement benefits to begin as early as 62, with the monthly amount increasing for each month claiming is delayed through age 70. A worker born in 1960 or later who claims at 62 receives 70% of the full-retirement-age benefit, while waiting until 70 produces 124% of that amount. The difference is substantial and generally lasts for life, including future cost-of-living adjustments.
The larger check does not settle the decision, however. Delaying means forgoing as many as eight years of payments and finding another way to fund those years. The best claiming age depends on health, longevity, marital status, taxes, employment, portfolio size and how much value the retiree places on receiving income during the early years of retirement.
Break-Even Math Is Useful but Incomplete
A break-even analysis compares the benefits collected early with the larger payments received after delaying. Depending on the claiming ages and assumptions used, someone who waits until 70 may need to live into the late 70s or early 80s before cumulative benefits surpass those collected by claiming earlier.
The calculation provides context, but it ignores several important variables. Benefits received at 62 can be spent, saved or invested, while the person delaying may need to withdraw more from retirement accounts. Taxes can differ between the two strategies, and a larger later benefit may be especially valuable to a surviving spouse.
Claims that investing early benefits at 5% pushes the break-even point into the 90s, or that an 8% return automatically makes delaying a mistake, should be treated cautiously. Investment returns are uncertain, while Social Security provides inflation-adjusted income backed by the federal government. Comparing a guaranteed benefit increase with an assumed stock-market return is not an equal-risk comparison.
The Social Security Administration’s own research shows that the preferred claiming age can change as the discount or investment rate changes, but it also depends on survival probabilities and the risk assigned to future payments. Higher assumed returns make early claiming appear more attractive mathematically, yet the retiree must actually invest the benefits, earn those returns after fees and taxes, and avoid spending the money.
Life Expectancy Should Be Measured From Retirement Age
Using average life expectancy at birth to make a claiming decision can be misleading. Someone who has already reached 62 or 65 has survived many of the mortality risks included in the national average and can expect to live longer than the headline figure suggests.
Social Security estimates that a man reaching 65 in 2026 will live, on average, to approximately 84.2, while a woman reaching 65 will live to about 86.8. Those are averages, meaning many people will live well beyond them.
Personal circumstances still matter more than population averages. Someone with a serious illness, a shorter family history or physically demanding work may reasonably place greater value on claiming early. A healthy person with long-lived parents and sufficient savings may benefit more from delaying because the larger payment protects against the financial risk of living into the 90s.
Social Security is partly longevity insurance. Delaying exchanges income during the early 60s for a larger guaranteed payment if the retiree lives a long time. Claiming early does the opposite, placing greater value on receiving money now while accepting a smaller check later.
Delaying Can Increase Pressure on the Portfolio
A retiree who stops working at 62 but waits until 70 must fund eight years without Social Security. That usually means spending more from cash, taxable investments or retirement accounts during the opening years of retirement.
Those withdrawals can be manageable when markets perform well. They become more dangerous when retirement begins near a major decline. Selling investments while prices are depressed can permanently reduce the number of shares available to recover, a problem known as sequence-of-returns risk.
Suppose Social Security at 62 would provide $2,000 a month. Delaying until 70 requires the household to replace $24,000 of annual income for eight years, or $192,000 before considering investment growth, taxes and cost-of-living adjustments. If that money must be withdrawn during a bear market, the cost to the portfolio may be larger than the simple total suggests.
Claiming early can reduce withdrawals and allow more investments to remain intact. That does not automatically make it superior, because the portfolio must later support spending alongside a smaller Social Security check. The relevant question is whether the household is better protected by preserving investments now or by securing more guaranteed income later.
Guaranteed Income Can Change Spending Behavior
Retirees do not always treat portfolio withdrawals and monthly income as interchangeable. Many are comfortable spending Social Security or pension checks but reluctant to sell investments, even when the financial plan says the withdrawal is affordable.
Receiving benefits at 62 can reduce anxiety and make the early retirement years feel more sustainable. The income may pay for housing, travel or ordinary expenses without requiring a monthly decision about which investments to sell. That psychological benefit is difficult to represent in break-even calculations but can affect whether retirees actually enjoy the money they accumulated.
The opposite response is also possible. Some people claim early because they fear Social Security will disappear, then spend benefits they did not need and later regret locking in a smaller payment. The decision should reflect a deliberate income plan rather than fear of government insolvency or a desire to “get something back” before it is too late.
The Higher Earner’s Decision Protects the Survivor
For married couples, Social Security should rarely be analyzed as two independent claiming decisions. When one spouse dies, the survivor generally keeps the larger of the two available benefits rather than continuing to receive both full payments.
That makes the higher earner’s claiming age especially important. Delaying the larger benefit can increase the income eventually available to the surviving spouse, who may live for many years after the first death while filing taxes as a single person and managing many of the same household expenses.
A coordinated strategy may have the lower earner claim earlier while the higher earner delays. The early benefit provides income during the couple’s active years, while the delayed benefit creates a larger long-term floor and stronger survivor protection.
This approach is not always optimal. Both spouses may claim early when health is poor or portfolio withdrawals would otherwise be excessive. Couples with substantial pensions or other guaranteed income may be comfortable delaying both benefits. The correct strategy depends on the size of each payment, expected longevity and which spouse is most likely to survive longer.
Claiming Early Can Be Reasonable When Health Is Poor
A person with a substantially shortened life expectancy may not receive enough years of the larger delayed benefit to recover the checks forgone between 62 and 70. In that situation, early claiming can provide income while the person is able to use it and may reduce pressure on a spouse or retirement portfolio.
The analysis should include survivor consequences before assuming that poor health always favors claiming. If the less-healthy spouse is the higher earner, delaying could still strengthen the surviving spouse’s future benefit. The household may choose to use other assets temporarily to protect that survivor income.
Health is also uncertain. Someone may claim early after receiving a serious diagnosis and then respond well to treatment, living far longer than expected with the reduced benefit. The decision must be based on reasonable medical expectations rather than a general fear that life is unpredictable.
Continuing to Work Can Weaken the Case for Claiming
People can claim Social Security while working, but benefits may be withheld before full retirement age when wages or self-employment income exceed the annual earnings limit. The withheld amounts are later reflected through a benefit recalculation, but the worker may receive little immediate cash from claiming.
Someone earning a substantial salary at 62 may therefore gain little from filing early, particularly when current income already places the household in a high tax bracket. Waiting can avoid unnecessary benefit withholding, increase the future payment and provide more time for additional earnings to improve the highest-35-year calculation.
A part-time worker earning below the limit may reach a different conclusion. Early Social Security can supplement reduced wages and help create a gradual transition into retirement without requiring large portfolio withdrawals.
Taxes Can Favor Either Strategy
Social Security benefits may become partly taxable when provisional income, which generally includes adjusted gross income, tax-exempt interest and half of Social Security, crosses federal thresholds. Traditional retirement-account withdrawals, pensions and investment income can therefore affect the after-tax value of claiming.
Taking Social Security early may cause more benefits to become taxable while the retiree still has wages or other income. Delaying can create several low-income years in which traditional IRA withdrawals or Roth conversions are completed at more favorable rates.
The reverse can also occur. A retiree who delays Social Security may need larger traditional-account withdrawals to fund expenses, increasing taxable income anyway. Once the larger benefit begins, it may overlap with pensions and required minimum distributions, creating a higher long-term tax burden.
The claiming decision should therefore be coordinated with a multiyear withdrawal strategy. The best age before tax may not be the best age after considering Roth conversions, capital gains and Medicare income-related premiums.
Early Claiming Is Not Completely Irreversible
Someone who begins benefits and quickly changes course may be able to withdraw the application within 12 months, generally by repaying benefits received by the worker and affected family members. The option is limited and can become expensive once the money has been spent.
A separate strategy becomes available after full retirement age. A beneficiary who has already claimed can voluntarily suspend payments and earn delayed retirement credits until restarting benefits or reaching 70. Social Security says suspended benefits can increase by as much as 8% a year, plus applicable inflation adjustments.
Suspension is not the same as reversing the original claim. The reduction for benefits received before full retirement age remains, while the new delayed credits increase the payment from that point forward. Benefits paid to certain family members on the worker’s record may also stop during the suspension, and Medicare premiums must be paid separately when they are no longer deducted from a Social Security check.
This flexibility can help someone who returns to work or no longer needs the income, but it should not be treated as a reason to claim casually at 62.
Waiting Is Often Strongest for Healthy Higher Earners
Delaying until 70 is particularly compelling for a healthy higher earner in a married couple who has enough savings to fund the intervening years. The strategy secures the largest available inflation-adjusted payment and can strengthen the survivor benefit.
It may also benefit single retirees concerned about longevity. A portfolio can fluctuate or be depleted, while Social Security continues for life and receives annual cost-of-living adjustments. Someone with limited pension income may value that guaranteed floor more than the possibility of earning a higher return by claiming and investing earlier.
Social Security confirms that benefits continue increasing for each month of delay through age 70, but no additional delayed credits accrue after that age.
Claiming at 62 Is Strongest When the Money Has a Clear Job
Early claiming is easier to defend when the benefits solve a defined problem. They may reduce withdrawals during a market downturn, allow a spouse to leave work, cover essential expenses during a gradual retirement or fund meaningful experiences during years when health and mobility are strongest.
The strategy is weaker when someone claims simply because 62 is the first eligible age or because the money might be invested at an assumed return. Investing early benefits can work, but many retirees will spend at least part of the money, and market performance may not match the projection.
A useful analysis should compare several claiming ages using actual Social Security estimates, not only 62 and 70. Claiming at 64, full retirement age or 68 may provide a compromise between receiving income earlier and securing a larger lifelong payment.
The Right Decision Is Personal, but Not Arbitrary
Social Security’s rules are designed to produce different monthly payments based on claiming age. For people born in 1960 or later, filing at 62 produces a 30% reduction from the full-retirement-age benefit, while delaying past 67 earns additional credits through 70.
Those percentages are only the beginning of the decision. Health determines how long the benefit may be collected, marriage determines the importance of survivor income and the portfolio determines whether delaying creates dangerous withdrawals. Taxes, employment and personal comfort with spending can alter the outcome further.
Claiming at 62 is not automatically a mistake, and waiting until 70 is not automatically wise. Early benefits can protect investments and improve life during the active years of retirement. Delayed benefits can create a larger, inflation-adjusted income floor that becomes increasingly valuable with age.
The strongest strategy is the one that recognizes what Social Security is meant to do. It is not merely an investment to be optimized by one break-even age. It is lifelong income insurance whose value depends on the household it is protecting.
Intended for educational purposes only. Opinions expressed are not intended as investment advice or to predict future performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Neither the information presented, nor any opinion expressed constitutes a solicitation for the purchase or sale of any security. Consult your financial professional before making any investment decisions. Opinions expressed are subject to change without notice.
IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES:
• Investment Advisory and Financial Planning Services are offered through Pure Financial Advisors, LLC. A Registered Investment Advisor.
• Pure Financial Advisors, LLC. does not offer tax or legal advice. Consult with a tax advisor or attorney regarding specific situations.
• Opinions expressed are subject to change without notice and are not intended as investment advice or to predict future performance.
• Investing involves risk including the potential loss of principal. No investment strategy can guarantee a profit or protect against loss in periods of declining values.
• All information is believed to be from reliable sources; however, we make no representation as to its completeness or accuracy.
• Intended for educational purposes only and are not intended as individualized advice or a guarantee that you will achieve a desired result. Before implementing any strategies discussed you should consult your tax and financial advisors.
