We Are Rethinking Our Social Security Claiming Strategy
Category: Social Security
September 18, 2025 – Anyone who has been following Topretirements for a while knows that we are a big proponent of delaying taking Social Security benefits as long as possible. But maybe is time to change that position.
Up to now the advantages of waiting to claim Social Security retirement benefits to age 70 have been pretty clear (for most people). For every year you wait to claim after age 66 you get an 8% increase in your benefits, up to age 70. Delaying has a second benefit because ir raises your COLA $ increase be every year. And, if your spouse’s benefit isn’t as high as yours, he or she will get your higher benefit for the rest of their life at your passing. If your finances are tight, all these advantages could be worth a lot. On the other hand, for people and couples who have a very short remaining life expectancy, or who need the money now to survive, it might not be a good idea to wait.
Comments on "We Are Rethinking Our Social Security Claiming Strategy"
RichPB says:
What is often not said is that, in addition, inflation will also bite into that cut much more by 2033. We know the CPI is not a true indication of inflation because key costs aren't included (like oil/gas). If our portion of fixed income is lower due to inflation, how does that impact?
Brad says:
You are assuming too much. The system, I mean all of it is solvent. Why peddle fear? You assume that what you were taught/learned was factual. It wasn't and isn't.
Daryl says:
I remember sitting in the social security office at age 63, asking whether I should take it now or wait until later for a bigger check (the old marshmallow test.) The guy at the desk ran the numbers, calculated the break even point, and said “I’d take the money and run.” Now I’m glad I did.
Stevo says:
My guess is that the Fed will means test your amount so that people who get small payouts will be ok and those who have more of other retirement income will get less. I think SS is the least of our worries. The federal debt is the elephant in the room and if something isn't done about that there will be major issues for everyone. History has seen this scenario repeat over and over again.
Chuck says:
I've been tracking whether to take SS early, at my FRA or wait until 70. The breakeven point for both me and my wife (everyone?) is roughly age 82. If you live past 82, you win. If you die before then, SS wins. We're betting on a long life as we're both reasonably healthy. Plus, if our representatives in Washington don't have the intestinal fortitude to fix SS, getting 70% of our benefits puts us back at a bit less than what we would have gotten at our FRA, which is still better than 70% of the FRA. That works for us, but everyone's situation is unique.
Louise says:
Daryl, I am totally with you! Took mine early and never looked back!
Another thing to think about is if a married couple waits and one spouse dies before either collected, the living spouse will only be able to collect on the one highest SS check. Meaning the money he or she could have collected can never be drawn. That money that could have been collected between age 62-70 is no longer an option.
Here is an example I asked Microsoft Copilot to do a comparison to show how both spouses waited till age 70 to draw and another couple who collected early. Both had a spouse that died around 70 years old.
Let’s walk through a clear, side-by-side example of two couples—one who claims Social Security early, and one who waits until age 70—to show how survivor benefits and lifetime income play out when one spouse dies shortly after turning 70.
? Assumptions for Both Couples
Both spouses worked and qualify for Social Security.
The higher earner’s full retirement age (FRA) benefit is $2,000/month.
The lower earner’s FRA benefit is $1,400/month.
Full Retirement Age is 67.
One spouse dies at age 70, shortly after claiming.
Survivor receives the higher of the two benefits, not both.
? Couple A: Claimed Early at Age 62
Higher earner gets $1,400/month (30% reduction from $2,000)
Lower earner gets $980/month (30% reduction from $1,400)
Combined monthly income: $2,380
Over 8 years (age 62–70):
Total received: $228,480
After one spouse dies at 70:
Survivor receives $1,400/month
If survivor lives to 85 (15 more years):
Survivor income: $252,000
Total household income over 23 years: $480,480
? Couple B: Waited Until Age 70
Higher earner gets $2,480/month (8% x 3 years = 24% increase)
Lower earner gets $1,732/month (same 24% increase)
Combined monthly income: $4,212
Over 1 year (age 70–71):
Total received: $50,544
After one spouse dies at 71:
Survivor receives $2,480/month
If survivor lives to 85 (14 more years):
Survivor income: $416,640
Total household income over 15 years: $467,184
?? Comparison Summary
Metric Couple A (Early) Couple B (Delayed)
Dual income years 8 years 1 year
Survivor income $1,400/month $2,480/month
Total household income $480,480 $467,184
? Key Takeaways
Couple A gets more total income over time because they had 8 years of dual checks, even though the survivor’s benefit is lower.
Couple B gets a much higher survivor benefit, but loses out on 8 years of dual income—and if one spouse dies early, the delayed strategy never fully pays off.
The longer both spouses live, the more delaying benefits becomes advantageous. But if one dies early, early claiming can be the better hedge.
Admin says:
One thing to consider is if you are deciding to take Social Security now, or if you have already been on it for several years. In the latter case, you will still probably be further ahead if you or your spouse live past 85, even with the cut that comes in 2034. That's because you have already collected so much before the cut comes. But if you are on the verge of collecting or many years away, you might want to consider claiming now so you get more years before the cuts (if they come!).
Stephen D. says:
I delayed my benefit this year when I turned 70. My wife will begin hers next year when she turns 65.. I have no regrets on our SS benefit strategy. Looking forward when I pass, (I’m 6 years older and male) she will receive my delayed benefit, about 1.5 times more than her benefit claiming at 65. If I claimed 8 years ago at 62, she would have to live with the higher of our benefits which would be hers, claiming at 65… Everyone is different, we were able to bridge the 6 year gap in earned income (I retired at 62, my wife retired at 60) with investments in rental properties, withdrawals from our retirement accounts and other small streams of income from alternative investments. Oh, by the way, during those years, we’ve traveled extensively both international and throughout the USA.
JCarol says:
Most people live to the level of their income so extra dollars received when taking SS at 62, 66 or 67 are likely to make early retirement years easier but later years harder, especially if one is widowed.
We delayed my husband's SS for the likely event one of us eventually survives the other. At that point those extra dollars will be very meaningful indeed, even with a retirement nest egg. I took my SS at 65 and his at 70. His benefit is 1.85 times mine.
I don't believe for a moment that current SS recipients’ benefits will be cut in 2033-ish. Congress will be (and should be) less concerned about pushback against raising FICA payroll deductions than of being overwhelmingly voted out of office by seniors facing slashed benefits — and by children and grandchildren of seniors who are contemplating grandparents couch surfing in their living rooms. Politicians promising to restore full benefits will swiftly be voted in.
Admin says:
I think you will find this piece from CBS News interesting - 90% of Americans disregard the #1 piece of advice about Social Security.