# The Social Security Claiming Strategy That Looks Smart — But Isn't
Claiming Social Security at age 62, the earliest eligible age, feels logical to many workers. You get money sooner. But this strategy often backfires.
Here's the math. Claiming at 62 reduces your monthly benefit permanently. A worker who waits until their full retirement age (66 or 67, depending on birth year) receives roughly 30% more per month. Someone who delays until 70 gets about 75% more than the age-62 amount.
Over a lifetime, these differences compound. If you live past 80, waiting typically pays off. You collect fewer checks early on but substantially larger checks later. The "break-even" point arrives around age 80. After that, delayed claiming usually wins.
The urgency to claim early sounds reasonable if you're worried about your health or think Social Security might disappear. But health concerns require honest assessment. Average life expectancy for a 62-year-old has climbed. Many people reach 85 or beyond. Those in good health particularly benefit from waiting.
The fear that Social Security will vanish also distorts thinking. The program faces funding challenges by 2034, but law doesn't allow benefits to simply disappear. Lawmakers will adjust the system before then. Even if changes happen, reducing benefits uniformly hits early claimers hardest because they've already locked in lower monthly amounts.
Married couples face another layer. The higher earner's benefit sets the spouse benefit. Delaying the larger earner's claim maximizes family income, especially if one spouse dies first. The surviving spouse inherits the higher benefit amount.
Exceptions exist. Claiming early makes sense if you need money urgently, have serious health problems, or believe you won't reach 75. But for most workers in decent health, claiming