FREE NEWSLETTER

Early Decision

James McGlynn  |  July 21, 2020

DELAYING SOCIAL Security until age 70 will get you the largest possible monthly benefit, and that’s the right strategy for many retirees. But what’s right for many folks won’t necessarily be right for you—and you may want to file at 62, the youngest possible age, so you maximize your total lifetime benefit.

If you’re single with no dependents, you should probably file at age 62 if you’re in poor health or your family doesn’t have great genes, and you don’t expect to live to age 80. Over this relatively short period, the smaller monthly benefit starting at age 62 will likely prove more valuable than waiting to get a larger monthly check. Similarly, if you’re single and have no other income to live on, by all means start Social Security at 62. In both instances—poor health or no other income—beginning at 62 should be the right decision, provided you don’t live into your 80s.

If you’re widowed, there may also be good reason to begin Social Security at age 62. Survivor benefits can typically start at age 60 and won’t get any larger if you delay beyond your full Social Security retirement age, which will be 66 or 67, depending on the year you were born. In some instances, a widow or widower might start her or his own benefit at age 62 and then switch over to survivor benefits at full retirement age, assuming the survivor benefit is bigger. Alternatively, those who are widowed might start survivor benefits at age 60 and then claim their own benefit—based on their own earnings history—at age 70, at which point it’ll be at its largest, thanks to the delay.

Whether you’re married or not, if you have dependents, you might be eligible for Social Security family benefits, on top of your own benefit. If you have dependent children under age 19, they might be able to collect 50% of your full retirement age benefit. The maximum total Social Security benefit is 180% of the parent’s full retirement age benefit.

I met a 62-year-old man who bragged to me about his 10-year-old twins—and how he could collect Social Security benefits for them. If you have adult disabled dependent children, you may also be eligible for family benefits, assuming the disability happened before age 22. In many cases, when there are dependent children or adult disabled children, filing at age 62 will maximize benefits.

A married couple might also decide to start Social Security benefits at age 62 as part of a strategy to maximize survivor benefits or to trigger spousal benefits. If both of the filers are in poor health—again, meaning not expected to reach age 80—then they should probably both file at age 62. If one of the couple is in poor health and the other is healthy, then the person with the smaller benefit should file at age 62 and the other should file at age 70, because—upon the death of the first spouse—the lower benefit disappears.

Another possibility: If one spouse was born before 1954 and the other, younger spouse has turned age 62, the younger spouse might file for benefits. That’ll allow the older spouse to file a restricted application for spousal benefits only. At age 70, the older spouse could then file for his or her own benefit. Note that this loophole, which has now been closed for most folks, remains open only for those born before 1954.

If the lower-earning spouse is much older than the higher-earning spouse, sometimes the higher-earning spouse will want to file at age 62. Until he or she files, the lower-earning spouse can’t receive spousal benefits. Let’s say the higher earner is eight years younger. If he or she waits until age 70 to claim benefits, the other spouse won’t receive spousal benefits until age 78.

Keep in mind two things about filing at age 62. First, if you’re still working and collecting Social Security benefits, there’s something called the earnings test that will reduce your benefit if your income exceeds $18,240 in 2020. Your benefit is reduced $1 for every $2 in excess of this amount. Once you reach your full retirement age, your benefit is adjusted upward for the benefits lost as a result of the earnings test.

Second, there’s a filing trick that few are aware of. If you file for benefits at age 62—or, indeed, at any age below your full Social Security retirement age—you’re able to suspend benefits at your full retirement age and then receive “delayed retirement credits” up to age 70. Perhaps you filed early to trigger dependent benefits for a few years, but now those dependents are no longer eligible because they’re too old. In that case, at your full retirement age, you might want to suspend your benefit until age 70 and collect the annual benefits increase of eight percentage points.

My general recommendation: Create your own online Social Security account. You can then run the calculations for your situation. The bottom line: Delaying until age 70 is often the right decision—but not always.

James McGlynn, CFA, RICP, is chief executive of Next Quarter Century LLC in Fort Worth, Texas, a firm focused on helping clients make smarter decisions about long-term-care insurance, Social Security and other retirement planning issues. He was a mutual fund manager for 30 years. James is the author of Retirement Planning Tips for Baby Boomers. His previous articles include Your 10-Year RewardFour Simple Tips and Filling the Gap.

Do you enjoy HumbleDollar? Please support our work with a donation. Want to receive daily email alerts about new articles? Click here. How about getting our weekly newsletter? Sign up now.

Subscribe
Notify of
7 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
R Quinn
R Quinn
10 months ago

I never could grasp this logic, “ maximize your total lifetime benefit.” What good does this do anyone? It seems to me that maximizing the monthly benefit is the goal. That’s what pays the bills every month. If a person started SS at age 62 it will be of little comfort at 75 if they struggle each month but received a bigger total over lifetime.

I think even mentioning the lifetime maximization as a strategy does a disservice to many average Americans too many of whom jump on the age 62 bandwagon already because they are convinced SS won’t be there or they want to get their money back.

As for not expecting to live to age 80, that’s another gamble, what if you do and beyond?

We also look at the delaying process wrong. We tell people they can increase their benefits. In fact, full retirement is age 70 and anything before that is an early retirement reduction.

Retirees should take their SS early only if they need to live on the payment at the time and hopefully don’t need a higher income eight years later.

wtfwjtd
wtfwjtd
10 months ago
Reply to  R Quinn

“Maximizing our total lifetime benefit” might actually be logical IF we knew exactly how many years our total lifetimes would consist of. But of course we don’t know this, and can’t possibly know this, so we give it our best (worst?) guess. I daresay there is a lot more emotion than logic that’s driving the claiming-decision process at this point. When this happens for many people, logic goes out the window, fear takes over, and taking a smaller payment today looks a lot more appealing than the promise of a much larger payment tomorrow.
I’m with you on this one, delaying claiming for the much larger pay-out later is nearly always the most beneficial move for most people. Although, as James helpfully points out, for married couples the decision is slightly different since it’s the claiming decision of the larger earner that’s by far most consequential.

parkslope
parkslope
10 months ago
Reply to  R Quinn

We are in complete agreement. Even though my wife has a health condition that will likely limit her longevity, we both waited until 70 to claim benefits. We also worked until 70 in jobs that, for the most part, we enjoyed. We retired last summer and it is reassuring to know that we have more than $81,000 in inflation adjusted SS benefits.

Jack  Hannam
Jack Hannam
10 months ago
Reply to  R Quinn

Agree with treating age 70 as full retirement age (FRA), and starting any time before then as “early”. I think terminology may subtly influence behavior. I’m reminded of psychological research which led to the suggestion that new employees be automatically enrolled in their company sponsored retirement plan with some specified minimal percentage of salary deferral, unless they opt out. In other words, this results in a higher rate of participation than if employees must opt in. Given your experience in advising employees I’m sure you understand this better than most. My wife and I are the same age, and are both retired. She began to draw benefits when she reached her FRA, and since we were both born (just) before 1954, I began to draw my spousal benefit based on her earnings, with the intention of switching to a larger amount based on my own earnings record at age 70. We otherwise view the larger benefit earned by delaying, for those who are fortunate to enjoy good health and who have the financial resources, to be a sort of “longevity protection”.

ScubaSkier
ScubaSkier
10 months ago

Another reason to begin collecting SS at 62 is the program is headed to insolvency and benefits likely will be cut. More likely, the benefits for those getting larger monthly payments will be cut by a larger percentage than those getting smaller payments. President Trump’s desire to cut payroll taxes will accelerate the date of insolvency.

Pete Tittl
Pete Tittl
10 months ago
Reply to  ScubaSkier

Disagree with this. It’s not headed to insolvency and if we get a Dem in the White House I’ll bet they scrap the cap and fix it.

Phil Dawson
Phil Dawson
10 months ago

Thank you for this reminder that there is no single best strategy for everyone. When you claim SS benefits your are indeed placing a bet in a game with random outcomes. A SS calculator is a good place to start learning the rules of the game. I have found this one to be detailed and friendly:

https://opensocialsecurity.com/

Free Newsletter

SHARE