Why You Should Delay Social Security Benefits
And the three reasons you might opt to claim sooner.

With more than 10,000 baby boomers crossing the retirement threshold each day, I get my share of clients asking whether they should delay their Social Security benefits. For many retirees, that can be a $200,000+ decision. That's the amount that top earners can expect to receive in excess of their normal benefits should they delay them until age 70.
Each year you delay your benefits past the age of 66 increases your benefit payout by 8%. Waiting until age 70 to start benefits results in a 32% increase in your monthly benefit for life. So I have to ask someone considering the question: "Where else can you earn a guaranteed 8% return on your money?"
Some planners argue that the benefit formula is actuarially sound and that, if you live an average lifespan, you'll receive roughly the same amount in benefits regardless of when you start them. The reasoning being that, if you take them at your full retirement age, you will receive a greater number of payments than if you wait.

Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free E-Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more - straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice - straight to your e-mail.
That may have been true one or two decades ago, but the formula, which was devised in 1983, doesn't take into account the current low interest rate environment or the greatly expanded life spans of today.
In today's environment, the question becomes, "Which assets should you sell off to generate income: your low-yielding assets or your high-yielding assets?" If you consider for the moment your Social Security benefit is an asset—after all, it generates an income stream, which has a present value—and it is generating an 8% return, wouldn't it make sense to keep it working for you? For high earning couples, the asset equivalent of their Social Security can be as high as $600,000 or $700,000. Even at $400,000 or $500,000, Social Security represents a sizable portion of a retirement portfolio.
In many ways, Social Security benefits function very similar to Treasury Inflation Protection Securities (TIPS), in that they have a fixed rate of return adjusted by inflation. However, in some ways, Social Security is even better because payouts are based on assumptions made more than three decades ago. As inflation increases, so too do the inflation-adjusted payments, which increases the value of the asset. The longer you live past the assumed mortality rate of 1983, the more valuable your benefits. But that won't always be the case. When interest rates increase, the value of Social Security benefits will decrease.
There may come a time when a bond portfolio will outperform Social Security, but for now, that is not the case. The growth of your Social Security asset is delivering a higher risk-adjusted return than most people generate in their investment portfolios. In the current environment, very few investments are outperforming delayed Social Security benefits. No other investment vehicle offers the following five things: inflation protection, government guarantee, lifetime income, has spousal and survivor benefits and eliminates market risk.
But return is only one part of the equation. As with any critical financial decision, there is no pat answer for this; it depends almost entirely on individual circumstances. However, in guiding my clients' decision, I do suggest that there may be only three reasons they might consider not delaying their benefits:
1. You really need the money.
If you didn't plan well and have to rely on your Social Security benefits to cover your lifestyle needs, then you may have no choice—other than, perhaps, continuing to work in some capacity. A part-time job could generate sufficient income to allow you to delay your benefits.
2. You're disabled.
If you are disabled and are claiming Social Security disability benefits, they automatically convert to a retirement benefit at your full retirement age.
3. You're sick, or you don't expect to live to your life expectancy.
This may be a good reason to start Social Security benefits as soon as possible, except if you are married.
For married couples the goal should be to maximize the lifetime income of the couple not just the individual. When you delay your benefits, they increase not only for you, but also for your surviving spouse. So the spouse with the largest social security income should wait to claim benefits until age 70, in order to maximize lifetime and survivor benefits. If you should die prematurely, your surviving spouse will receive the higher of his or her own benefit or the one you leave behind. If your spouse's earnings were significantly less than yours, he or she may benefit more from the survivor benefit.
Outside of these three reasons, everyone should consider delaying their Social Security. Of course, such a critical decision should be based on a comprehensive analysis of your retirement income need, an evaluation of your retirement portfolio and a detailed spend-down plan.
Craig Slayen is a principal at Cypress Partners., a financial planning and investment management firm in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Pete Woodring, a partner with Cypress Partners, contributed to this article.
Profit and prosper with the best of Kiplinger's advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and much more. Delivered daily. Enter your email in the box and click Sign Me Up.

Craig Slayen is a principal at Cypress Partners., a financial planning and investment management firm in the San Francisco Bay Area.
The firm believes that the key determinant to long term financial success is based around three concepts: sound planning, prudent investing, and an awareness of the behavioral traps that can kill portfolio returns.
Craig is the author of Successful Investing for Female CEO's, published by Charles Pinot. He is a graduate of UC Berkeley.
-
Could Screen Time Be Good for Your Health?
We all love our screen time. Could your tech habit be helping you age gracefully? The answer is astonishing.
-
These Cities Have the Most Dangerous Drivers — And It Could Cost You
A new list shows the cities where you're most likely to encounter collisions, making it a dangerous place to drive. That factor could also raise your insurance costs.
-
Investing Professionals Agree: Discipline Beats Drama Right Now
Big portfolio adjustments can do more harm than good. Financial experts suggest making thoughtful, strategic moves that fit your long-term goals.
-
'Doing Something' Because of Volatility Can Hurt You: Portfolio Manager Recommends Doing This Instead
Yes, it's hard, but if you tune out the siren song of high-flying sectors, resist acting on impulse and focus on your goals, you and your portfolio could be much better off.
-
Social Security's First Beneficiary Lived to Be 100: Will You?
Ida May Fuller, Social Security's first beneficiary, retired in 1939 and died in 1975. Today, we should all be planning for a retirement that's as long as Ida's.
-
An Investment Strategist Demystifies Direct Indexing: Is It for You?
You've heard of mutual funds and ETFs, but direct indexing may be a new concept ... one that could offer greater flexibility and possible tax savings.
-
Q2 2025 Post-Mortem: Rebound, Risks and Generational Shifts
As the third quarter gets underway, here are some takeaways from the market's second-quarter performance to consider as you make investment decisions.
-
Why Homeowners Should Beware of Tangled Titles
If you're planning to pass down property to your heirs, a 'tangled title' can complicate things. The good news is it can be avoided. Here's how.
-
A Cautionary Tale: Why Older Adults Should Think Twice About Being Landlords
Becoming a landlord late in life can be a risky venture because of potential health issues, cognitive challenges and susceptibility to financial exploitation.
-
Home Equity Evolution: A Fresh Approach to Funding Life's Biggest Needs
Homeowners leverage their home equity through various strategies, such as HELOCs or reverse mortgages. A newer option: Shared equity models. How do those work, and what are the pros and cons?