I also managed to wait to age 70. I did go through a year-by-year assessment as to whether I “needed” to claim each year (starting at age 63, when I retired). While not planned, I had some part-time work that provided additional income until age 68 so that help us as well. Waiting also allowed us to increase our Roth conversion amounts over a six-year period (due to less overall income). That opportunity allowed us to convert 40% of our portfolio to Roth. That reduction of our T-IRA reduced our RMD proportionally, which further reduced the taxable portion of our SS benefit from 85% to 73%. We have the potential to reduce it down to 60% by using the revised method of RMD calculation allowed by Secure Act 2.0 (since we also annuitized part of our T-IRA). It is difficult to total up the financial benefit of waiting if you also factor these situations. Awhile back in response to a question regarding investing SS benefits claimed at FRA (vs waiting to age 70), I did a “what if” analysis. This analysis compared collecting SS at FRA (age 66 in this case) and investing such assets for four years (assuming 5% rate of return) against having an extra 32% at age 70. If I use $30K as the benefit at FRA, the investment path computes to $135,769. By waiting four additional years, you get $9,600 extra. In essence, this is comparable to getting $9,600 “annuity income” or equivalent to a 7.1% lifetime payout, with inflation-protected COLA. If you use a guaranteed investment rate of return of 6% (instead of 5%), the payout rate reduces to 6.9% (still not too bad for an inflation-protected benefit). If you are married, as the higher income earner, you can also consider this income “addition” to be a joint-survivor benefit. If you had the option of “investing” $135,769 with a guaranteed return of 7.1% and have that principal “grow” at the rate of inflation (CPI-W), would you take that deal? To illustrate that last statement, let’s assume that the CPI-W was 3%. That $9,600 would increase to $9,888 after one year. At a 7.1% payout, the effective principal to generate that benefit would be $139,842 (a 3% “growth” of the initial principal). While there is no such principal, this is another way to look at comparing claiming early or waiting from a financial viewpoint.
Comments
I also managed to wait to age 70. I did go through a year-by-year assessment as to whether I “needed” to claim each year (starting at age 63, when I retired). While not planned, I had some part-time work that provided additional income until age 68 so that help us as well. Waiting also allowed us to increase our Roth conversion amounts over a six-year period (due to less overall income). That opportunity allowed us to convert 40% of our portfolio to Roth. That reduction of our T-IRA reduced our RMD proportionally, which further reduced the taxable portion of our SS benefit from 85% to 73%. We have the potential to reduce it down to 60% by using the revised method of RMD calculation allowed by Secure Act 2.0 (since we also annuitized part of our T-IRA). It is difficult to total up the financial benefit of waiting if you also factor these situations. Awhile back in response to a question regarding investing SS benefits claimed at FRA (vs waiting to age 70), I did a “what if” analysis. This analysis compared collecting SS at FRA (age 66 in this case) and investing such assets for four years (assuming 5% rate of return) against having an extra 32% at age 70. If I use $30K as the benefit at FRA, the investment path computes to $135,769. By waiting four additional years, you get $9,600 extra. In essence, this is comparable to getting $9,600 “annuity income” or equivalent to a 7.1% lifetime payout, with inflation-protected COLA. If you use a guaranteed investment rate of return of 6% (instead of 5%), the payout rate reduces to 6.9% (still not too bad for an inflation-protected benefit). If you are married, as the higher income earner, you can also consider this income “addition” to be a joint-survivor benefit. If you had the option of “investing” $135,769 with a guaranteed return of 7.1% and have that principal “grow” at the rate of inflation (CPI-W), would you take that deal? To illustrate that last statement, let’s assume that the CPI-W was 3%. That $9,600 would increase to $9,888 after one year. At a 7.1% payout, the effective principal to generate that benefit would be $139,842 (a 3% “growth” of the initial principal). While there is no such principal, this is another way to look at comparing claiming early or waiting from a financial viewpoint.
Post: Rethinking the “Right” Time for Social Security
Link to comment from April 25, 2026