Brian O'Connell at NTD wrote about the case for waiting until full retirement age to claim Social Security, 67 for anyone born in 1960 or later, and asked me what a person actually gains by waiting.
Three things. You get 100% of your calculated benefit, built on your highest 35 earning years, instead of a permanently reduced check. You preserve the full baseline for any spousal benefit, up to 50% of yours, so a claiming decision made for one person does not shrink the household's income. And you avoid the earnings test that penalizes people who claim early while still working, which catches a lot of part-time retirees off guard. Past full retirement age, delayed credits keep adding about 8% a year until 70.
I also gave the other side, because waiting is not automatic. If you have serious health issues, claiming earlier might produce a better cumulative outcome. And there is an opportunity cost argument if your investable assets could earn a strong return during the delay, though that argument usually assumes returns the retiree cannot count on.
The mistake to avoid is deciding by rule of thumb in either direction. Run the numbers for your health, your spouse's benefit, your work plans and your other income. For most healthy couples the math favors waiting, and for the higher earner it favors waiting to 70. For some individuals it does not, and that is fine. The point is to decide, not default.
Read the full article at NTD →
