When to Take Social Security Benefits

If you turn 62 this year, you're eligible to start your checks. But you might be better off waiting.

By Mary Beth Franklin, Senior Editor

From Kiplinger's Personal Finance magazine, January 2008
Text Size T T

Advertisement

Call it a silver tsunami, and call Kathleen Casey-Kirschling the tip of the wave. The oldest baby-boomer, Casey-Kirschling turns 62 at a tick after midnight on January 1, 2008, and she has already applied for Social Security benefits. Over the next 20 years, nearly 80 million boomers will be eligible to follow her lead. But just because you can apply at 62 doesn't mean you should.

If you were born between 1943 and 1954, you cannot receive full benefits until age 66. You may start collecting Social Security as early as 62, but your monthly check will be reduced by 25% for the rest of your life.

Collecting early makes sense for early retiree Casey-Kirschling. Social Security benefits will provide welcome income for the former teacher and nutrition consultant, and the reduction in benefits isn't a concern because she and her husband, Patrick, each have a pension and personal savings. "Social Security is just another supplement to our retirement," she says. "It's not the whole package and was never meant to be."

RELATED LINKS
Your Retirement Problems Sovled
Ready, Set, Retire
Six Critical Missteps

Now or later? For others, deciding when to take Social Security benefits isn't so obvious. "There's a tendency to grab the bird in hand and collect benefits as soon as you can," says Conrad Ciccotello, professor of financial planning at Georgia State University. That's what the majority of retirees do. "But with longer life expectancies, the decision to take benefits early is less appropriate," says Ciccotello. There are only two scenarios in which the decision is clear-cut. "If you are ill and expect to die within the next few years, taking benefits at 62 makes more sense than waiting till 66," says Ciccotello. "Alternatively, if you plan to continue working, it pays to wait until the earnings test disappears."

In 2008, if you continue to work while collecting Social Security and you are younger than 66, you can earn up to $13,560 without jeopardizing Social Security benefits. After that, you lose $1 in benefits for every $2 you earn over the limit. Once you turn 66, you can earn any amount without reducing your benefits.

Over an average lifetime, you will collect about the same amount whether you take smaller benefits early or larger benefits later. But if you live beyond your so-called break-even age (which you can calculate at www.ssa.gov), you're better off waiting.

One problem with that calculation, says Ciccotello, is that it doesn't take investment earnings into account. Claiming benefits early might allow you to keep more of your savings invested longer. In that case, the higher your rate of return, the more sense it makes to let your savings grow and take benefits early.

Marital matters. Single workers, particularly those with little savings, should consider working as long as possible to maximize their Social Security benefits. For every year you delay collecting benefits beyond 66, you earn an 8% credit, up to 132% of your normal retirement benefit at age 70.

Married couples face the most challenging timing decision, especially if their income varies widely. The lower-earning spouseQusually the wifeQis entitled to three types of benefits: one based on her own earnings; a spousal benefit equal to half of her husband's benefit if it exceeds her own; and a survivor benefit equal to 100% of her husband's benefit after he dies. Although her retirement benefit would be permanently reduced if she collected early, she would still be entitled to her full survivor benefit as long as she was at least 66 when she collected it. To maximize survivor income, the husband should delay benefits as long as possible.

Get Kiplinger's Personal Finance magazine for $12. Save 75%!

Discuss

Reader Comments (7)

Posted by: Phil at 12/11/2007 11:50:16 AM

Another variable is now becoming apparent. Baby boomers are often overweight and have been eating fast food most of their lives. Although many are active and seem physically fit, many more aren't. I have lost so many friends just entering their fifties that I suspect our generation will actually have a shorter life span than our parents. The people now living longer than average are part of our parents generation and not ours. I retired early.

Posted by: Tess at 12/13/2007 02:46:33 AM

Phil has a good point. But I suspect that the cholesterol-lowering drugs, current focus on exercise, losing weight, and staying upbeat via anti-depressants may prolong the lifespans to counter the negative eating habits. At least I hope so, as a 60-something, and growing up with daily bologna sandwiches! Now it's lean meat or fish, veggies, and fruit....what a change.

Another factor could also be the stress of continuing to work to pay the high cost of housing/mortgages so one can still live near children and grandchildren. It's difficult to make decisions with so many factors to consider and not knowing how many years we need to pay for living. In the future it may be easier....knowing one's genetic make-up and odds of making it to each decade would certainly help with deciding when to retire, when to downsize, whether to take that cruise now or in 10 years. As it is, one must smell the roses along the way and fulfill a little bit of the dream each year or risk an early demise.

Posted by: Steve at 12/26/2007 07:38:03 AM

Can you collect the 50% spousal benefit at age 62, then switch at age 66 to collect 100% based on your own earnings? Or, is no switching allowed? Anybody know?

Posted by: David Jackson at 12/29/2007 02:36:51 PM

I have read numerous articles in financial publications in recent years about when to take Social Security benefits but none of them have ever addressed my concern. When you turn 65 and sign up for Medicare you then have Medicare premiums (Part B & D) deducted from your Social Security check. However, if you delay taking Social Security past 65 then you will have to pay those premiums out of pocket. At least that is how I understand it. Should that not be a determining factor on when to start receiving benefits?

Posted by: Barbara at 12/31/2007 01:09:04 PM

My former spouse has reached full retirement Soc Sec. benefits. If I collect on his benefit as a divorced spouse (50%) at age 62 - is that benefit reduced by 25% for my age or can I collect the full eligible amount since he has full benefits?

Posted by: fundalarmer at 12/31/2007 09:18:10 PM

I don't get this. If I wait I might die but wife will get half...I mean if she makes more money then I don't receive.. god Im confused

Posted by: David Jackson at 01/02/2008 01:53:47 PM

When you turn 65 you sign up for Medicare, and then Medicare premiums (part B and D) are deducted from your Social Security check. If you delay Social Security past age 65 those premiums will then have to be paid out of your own pocket. That is definitely a factor in deciding when to take Social Security benefits.

Today's Video More Videos >>

Extra Cash for the Holidays

E-mail Alerts: Select the Kiplinger columns and topics to be delivered to your inbox:

Advertisement