Should my wife claim Social Security at 62 while I delay until 70? Weighing spousal benefit strategy

This is a smart question about spousal benefit coordination. Here's the key thing to understand: when one spouse has significantly higher earnings (like in your case), having the lower-earning spouse claim early while the higher earner delays can often maximize your household's total lifetime benefits.When your wife claims at 62, yes, she'll get about 30% less than her FRA amount (so around $1,330 instead of $1,900). But she'll collect those payments for 5 extra years compared to waiting until her FRA. That's approximately $79,800 in benefits she would otherwise miss out on.The critical point: When you pass away (hopefully many years from now), she'll step up to your higher survivor benefit regardless of when she claimed her own benefits. So her early filing reduction only affects her during the years you're both alive.This strategy often makes mathematical sense when: 1) there's a significant difference between the spouses' benefit amounts, and 2) the higher earner is delaying to 70.

Thank you for such a clear explanation! I never realized her early filing reduction wouldn't affect her survivor benefits. So if I understand correctly, she can claim at 62, get reduced benefits while we're both alive, but then automatically switch to my full delayed retirement amount when I pass away? That definitely changes the calculation.

my wife filed at 62 and I waited til 70. worked great for us! she got smaller checks for years but we needed some income while I was still investing in my business. now shes getting way more as spouse than she did on her own record. you should talk to ssa directly though cause everyones situation is different!!

Just to clarify something important - your wife is likely NOT receiving a spousal benefit that's higher than her own benefit if she filed for her own benefits at 62. Once she files for her own retirement, she can't switch to spousal benefits later - she gets the higher of the two, but her early filing reduction sticks forever. She might be getting more NOW because you're finally collecting your benefit (which allowed her to get a spousal add-on), but it's still reduced from what she could have gotten by waiting. This is why this stuff is so confusing!

The strategy being suggested (wife claims at 62, husband delays to 70) is generally sound in your situation, but there are some additional considerations:Let's look at the break-even point: The break-even age for your wife claiming at 62 vs. 67 would typically be around her mid-80s. So if she lives beyond that, waiting would provide more lifetime benefits. However, that calculation changes when we factor in that she'll eventually receive survivor benefits based on your record.Another advantage: If you're still working, having some Social Security income from her benefit could reduce the need to draw from retirement accounts, allowing more time for those investments to grow.Keep in mind: If your wife is still working at 62, she'll be subject to the earnings test until her FRA. In 2025, she would lose $1 in benefits for every $2 she earns above $23,650 (approximate indexed amount). So if she's earning significantly above that, it might make claiming early less attractive.Basically, this strategy works best when: 1) the higher-earning spouse is expected to pass away first, 2) the lower-earning spouse won't have high earnings subject to the earnings test, and 3) you don't expect both of you to live well into your 90s.

This is really helpful - I hadn't considered the earnings test. My wife plans to work part-time for a few more years, probably earning around $30,000 annually until she's 65 or so. Sounds like that would reduce her benefits somewhat but not eliminate them entirely. And you're right about reducing our withdrawals from retirement accounts - that's definitely a plus.

BE CAREFUL!!! My husband and I did something similar and I filed at 62 thinking it was a smart move. Now I'm stuck with a tiny check FOREVER!!! They don't explain this stuff clearly and I'm getting $580 less EVERY MONTH than if I had waited!!! Nobody told me the reduction was PERMANENT!DO NOT TRUST what you read online - go TALK to someone at SSA directly because everyone's situation is different. The calculations are WAY more complicated than these people make it sound! There are also issues with Medicare premiums and taxes they don't tell you about.

I'm sorry you had a negative experience. You're absolutely right that everyone's situation is different, and the reduction for claiming early is indeed permanent. However, in this specific case, since the husband's benefit is significantly higher, his wife's survivor benefit will be based on his record when he passes away, regardless of when she claimed her own benefit.But your point about consulting directly with SSA is excellent advice. These decisions have lifetime consequences, and it's worth getting personalized guidance.

Has anyone acutally tried calling SS lately? Ive been trying for weeks and cant get anyone on the phone. Kept on hold for 3+ hours twice then got disconnected!! So frustrating when trying to plan something this important!!

I had the exact same problem last month trying to get clarification on my wife's spousal benefits. After getting disconnected three times, I finally used a service called Claimyr (claimyr.com) that holds your place in line and calls you back when an agent is available. Worked perfectly and I got through in about 40 minutes instead of waiting for hours. They have a demo video at https://youtu.be/Z-BRbJw3puU that shows how it works. Really helped when I needed to discuss our filing strategy with an actual SSA rep.

thanks, I'll check that out! at this point I'll try anything because this is driving me CRAZY

quick question - has anyone considered what happens if the wife claims at 62 but the higher-earning husband passes away before claiming at 70? would she still get his age 70 amount or just what he would've gotten at his age when he died? this always confuses me with survivor benefits

Great question. If the higher-earning spouse dies before claiming benefits, the survivor benefit calculation works differently:If the husband in this scenario died before claiming at 70, the wife would be eligible for a survivor benefit based on what he would have received if he had claimed on the date of his death. So it would include all delayed retirement credits earned up to that point, but not the full age-70 amount if he hadn't reached 70 yet.This is why some financial advisors recommend that the higher earner consider whether delaying past FRA makes sense if their health is poor or they have a family history of shorter lifespans.

I hadn't even considered this scenario. Fortunately, I'm in excellent health with longevity in my family, but it's definitely something to keep in mind. The survivor benefit rules are more complex than I realized.

do u know if ur wife also gets the dela y credits when she gets ur benefit as a survivor? like if u get 132% of ur FRA by waiting to 70 does she also get that full amount or just ur FRA amount?

Yes, the surviving spouse receives the FULL amount including all delayed retirement credits that the deceased spouse earned by waiting past FRA. This is one of the main reasons many financial advisors recommend the higher-earning spouse delay claiming until 70 - it creates a larger survivor benefit that lasts for the rest of the surviving spouse's life.In your example, she would get the full 132% of his FRA amount (not just his FRA amount) when receiving survivor benefits. This is a key advantage of the strategy being discussed.

That's exactly my goal - to ensure my wife has the highest possible income for the rest of her life if I predecease her. Now I'm feeling more confident about our strategy of me delaying until 70 while she potentially claims earlier.

WAIT A MINUTE! Isn't there something about her being able to get spousal benefits (50% of your FRA benefit) when you start collecting? If she takes her own benefit at 62 won't that mess up her chance to get the higher spousal amount??? The rules changed so much I'm totally confused about how this works now.

You're thinking of the right concept, but there's some confusion about how it works. Here's the clarification:If she files for her own retirement benefit at 62, she'll be deemed to have filed for any spousal benefits she might be eligible for once you begin collecting. At that point, she'll receive the higher of:1. Her own reduced retirement benefit (reduced because she claimed at 62)2. A combination of her own benefit plus a spousal add-on that would bring her total up to the equivalent of a reduced spousal benefit (reduced because she claimed before her FRA)The deemed filing rules changed with the 2015 Bipartisan Budget Act, eliminating many of the clever \

This is a critical point I hadn't fully understood. So if her own FRA benefit is $1,900, and spousal would be $1,750 (50% of my FRA amount), then there wouldn't even be a spousal add-on since her own benefit is higher. So the only calculation that matters is whether getting those reduced payments for 5 extra years outweighs the permanent reduction. I really appreciate everyone helping me think through all the angles!

You've got the right idea now! Since your wife's own benefit ($1,900 at FRA) is higher than the spousal benefit she'd be entitled to (50% of your $3,500 = $1,750), spousal benefits won't come into play at all. This actually simplifies your decision quite a bit. The math becomes straightforward: Is it worth her collecting approximately $1,330/month for 5 extra years (ages 62-67) in exchange for permanently giving up $570/month ($1,900 - $1,330) for the rest of her life while you're both alive? That's about $79,800 in "extra" benefits during those 5 years. Given that she'll eventually step up to your full survivor benefit (including your delayed credits), and considering you're both in good health, this strategy makes a lot of sense. The key insight everyone's been sharing is correct - her early filing penalty essentially becomes temporary since it only affects the years when you're both collecting. One final thought: Since you mentioned she'll be working part-time until 65, you might want to run the numbers on whether it makes sense for her to wait until 65 (when her earnings won't trigger the earnings test anymore) rather than 62. But the core strategy of her claiming before you reach 70 still holds.

Welcome to the community! As someone who works in retirement planning, I wanted to add one more consideration that hasn't been fully addressed - the tax implications of this strategy. When your wife claims at 62 while you delay until 70, you'll have several years where your household has lower Social Security income but potentially higher withdrawals from tax-deferred accounts like 401(k)s or IRAs if you need the cash flow. This could actually be beneficial for tax planning - you might be able to do Roth conversions during those years while you're in a lower tax bracket, before your higher benefit kicks in at 70. Also, spreading your Social Security income over more years (starting with her benefit at 62) rather than having both benefits start later could help manage your Medicare Part B premiums down the road, since those are based on your modified adjusted gross income. Just another angle to consider when running your numbers!

As someone who just started learning about Social Security strategies, this entire discussion has been incredibly educational! I'm in a similar situation to Noah - my husband and I have a significant earnings gap, and I've been wondering whether I should claim early while he delays. The key insight that really clicked for me is how the survivor benefit calculation works. I had no idea that my early filing reduction would essentially become "temporary" since I'd eventually step up to his full delayed benefit amount. That completely changes the math compared to what I was thinking. I'm also grateful for the mentions of additional considerations like the earnings test, tax implications, and Medicare premium effects. It's clear that this isn't just a simple "claim early vs. wait" decision - there are so many interconnected factors to consider. One question I have: for those who've actually implemented this strategy, how did you handle the emotional/psychological aspect of "permanently" reducing your own benefit? Even knowing it's mathematically sound, I imagine it might feel uncomfortable to accept that reduced monthly amount. Thanks to everyone who shared their experiences and expertise. This community is such a valuable resource for navigating these complex decisions!

This has been such an enlightening thread to follow! As someone new to Social Security planning, I'm amazed at how many nuanced factors go into what seems like a straightforward decision. The discussion about survivor benefits essentially making early filing reductions "temporary" is a game-changer for understanding this strategy. I'm particularly struck by the tax planning opportunities that CosmicCowboy mentioned - using those intermediate years for Roth conversions while in lower tax brackets is brilliant. It shows how Social Security timing isn't just about maximizing benefits, but optimizing your entire financial picture. For others like me who are just starting to research these strategies, I'd recommend paying close attention to the earnings test discussion if you're planning to work after claiming. That $23,650 threshold (approximately) can significantly impact whether early claiming makes sense. One thing I'm curious about: has anyone used financial planning software or worked with advisors to model these scenarios? With so many variables (life expectancy, tax brackets, earnings test, survivor benefits), it seems like having professional analysis could be valuable for such an important decision. Thanks to everyone for sharing their knowledge and experiences - this community is incredibly helpful for navigating these complex choices!

As someone who's been following this discussion closely, I wanted to share some insights from my experience helping clients navigate similar situations. The strategy you're considering - having your wife claim at 62 while you delay until 70 - is often optimal when there's a significant earnings gap, but there are a few additional considerations worth exploring. First, regarding the earnings test that Katherine mentioned: with your wife earning around $30,000 annually, she'd lose about $1 for every $2 earned above the $23,650 threshold. So roughly $3,175 in annual benefit reduction until she reaches FRA. You'll want to factor this into your break-even calculations. Second, consider the "do-over" option: if circumstances change significantly, your wife has a 12-month window after filing to withdraw her application and repay all benefits received (without interest). This provides some flexibility if your situation changes. Finally, I'd strongly recommend getting a personalized Social Security statement analysis before making the final decision. While the strategy makes mathematical sense in your case, factors like state taxes on Social Security benefits, your specific retirement account balances, and other income sources can all influence the optimal timing. The consensus in this thread is sound - just make sure you're working with your complete financial picture rather than Social Security benefits in isolation.