Myth: Always Take Social Security at 62

Should you take Social Security the moment you can, at 62? For most people with savings, no. The “grab it early before it’s gone” instinct feels smart and quietly hands you the smallest possible benefit for the rest of your life. Claiming at 62 isn’t wrong for everyone. As a default rule, it’s one of the most expensive habits in retirement.

Why early feels right

The logic sounds airtight. Start at 62, collect for more years, and don’t bet on a government program lasting. Bird in the hand. And for some people it genuinely is the right call, which is why the myth survives. If you’re in poor health, or you simply need the income to live, taking it early can be exactly correct.

But “I might die early” and “the program might vanish” are doing a lot of emotional lifting in that argument, and neither holds up as a planning default for a healthy, well-funded retiree.

What you actually give up

Here’s the mechanism the early-claim crowd glosses over. Your benefit is permanently reduced for claiming before your full retirement age, which for anyone born in 1960 or later is 67. Claim at 62 and you lock in a check that’s roughly 30% smaller than your full benefit, for life, adjusted upward only by inflation from that lower base.

Then there’s the other direction nobody talks about as much. Every year you wait past full retirement age up to 70, your benefit grows through delayed retirement credits, about 8% a year. Wait from 67 to 70 and you bank a benefit roughly 24% larger than your full amount, permanently. That’s a guaranteed, inflation-protected raise you can’t buy anywhere else.

So the choice at 62 isn’t “money now versus money later.” It’s “the smallest check for life versus a check up to 77% larger.” Framed honestly, the bird in the hand is a much smaller bird.

The hidden price: the earnings test and the survivor

Two second-order effects make early claiming worse than it looks for affluent households.

First, if you claim at 62 and keep working, the earnings test claws part of it back. For 2026, if you’re under full retirement age all year, Social Security withholds $1 for every $2 you earn above $24,480. So the executive who claims early and stays on a board or consults part-time may watch much of the check disappear, and pay tax on what’s left. You took the reduced benefit and couldn’t keep it.

Second, and this is the one that matters most for couples. Your benefit doesn’t just fund your retirement. When the higher earner dies, the survivor keeps the larger of the two benefits and loses the smaller. So the check the higher earner claims becomes the floor the surviving spouse lives on, potentially for a decade or more. Claim small at 62 and you’ve shrunk your spouse’s income for the rest of their life. Delay, and you’ve bought them the largest possible survivor benefit. That’s not a small decision. It’s often the single most valuable move in the whole plan.

How to think about it

For a married couple with savings, the move that usually wins is to have the higher earner delay toward 70 to lock in the biggest benefit for both lives, while the lower earner’s claim can be more flexible. The savings bridge the gap in the meantime, and you’re effectively buying a larger inflation-protected pension by spending down some portfolio early.

There’s a tax angle too, since how much of your benefit gets taxed depends on the rest of your income, and that’s worth coordinating with your withdrawals through some smart taxation planning.

The honest version is this. Take it at 62 if your health or your cash flow demands it. But as a reflex, claiming early locks in the smallest check you’ll ever get and quietly cuts the income your spouse may depend on long after you’re gone. The money isn’t going anywhere. Waiting is how you make it bigger.