< Back to Social Security Administration

When should my husband delay Social Security until 70? Worried about survivor benefits

My husband (62) wants to claim Social Security retirement now, but I've been telling him to wait until 70. He earned significantly more than me throughout our careers, and I'm concerned about what happens when one of us passes. From what I understand, as the surviving spouse, I'd only receive his benefit amount, not both of ours combined. Since I'm 5 years younger and women tend to outlive men, I'm worried I'll be struggling financially if he claims early and gets a permanently reduced benefit. He argues that taking benefits early means more money now when we're younger and can enjoy it. But I keep thinking about those potentially difficult final years - healthcare costs are insane now and will only get worse by the time we're in our 80s. Is it really that significant of a difference to wait until 70? His FRA benefit would be around $3,100/month, but he could get about $4,200/month if he waits until 70. My benefit at FRA will only be about $1,750. Does anyone have experience with making this decision and how it affected your finances later in life? Are there other factors we should consider?

0 coins

14 comments

Dylan Mitchell

•20d

You're absolutely right to be thinking about survivor benefits in this situation. When one spouse passes away, the surviving spouse receives either their own benefit OR their deceased spouse's benefit, whichever is higher - but not both. This is why having the higher-earning spouse delay until 70 is often considered good financial planning for couples. The difference between claiming at 62 vs 70 is substantial - approximately a 76% increase in monthly benefits. In your husband's case, claiming at 62 might mean a benefit closer to $2,300/month instead of the $4,200/month at 70. That's nearly $1,900 monthly difference that would directly impact your financial security as a survivor. One strategy some couples consider is having the lower earner claim earlier while the higher earner delays. This provides some income while maximizing the eventual survivor benefit. Has your husband considered continuing to work while delaying benefits?

0 coins

Fatima Al-Suwaidi

•20d

Thank you for confirming my concerns. I hadn't thought about the strategy of me claiming early while he delays. I'm still working part-time and was planning to keep going until at least my FRA (67), but maybe I should reconsider and file at 62? My husband is getting tired of working full-time but could probably switch to consulting. He's just worried about 'leaving money on the table' if something happens to him before 70. Is there a break-even point we should be considering?

0 coins

Dmitry Popov

•20d

I spent 32 years as a financial advisor specializing in retirement planning, and this question came up almost daily. The math overwhelmingly supports delaying the higher earner's benefit until 70 when there's a significant difference between spouses' earnings records. The break-even point is typically around age 80-82 for someone delaying from 62 to 70. But that calculation changes dramatically when considering survivor benefits. For married couples, you're not just planning for two individual lifespans, but for the longest of the two lifespans. With women living 5+ years longer than men on average, and you being 5 years younger already, there's a high statistical probability you'll spend many years as a widow receiving that survivor benefit. One factor many don't consider: Social Security COLAs (Cost of Living Adjustments) are calculated on your base benefit. So delaying not only gives you a higher initial amount but also larger dollar increases with each annual COLA.

0 coins

Ava Garcia

•20d

I agree with everything you said! I wanted to add that the 8% per year increase for delaying past FRA is essentially a guaranteed return that's hard to beat with any investment. Plus it's inflation-protected and backed by the government. One thing I'd suggest for the OP - if your husband is worried about "leaving money on the table" if he passes before 70, look into term life insurance that would cover those years between 62-70. It can be a relatively inexpensive way to address that specific concern while still maximizing the survivor benefit.

0 coins

Miguel Silva

•20d

I had the same experience trying to file for my benefits! After multiple failed attempts and hours on hold, I found this service called Claimyr (claimyr.com) that got me connected to a real SSA agent in under 20 minutes. It was a lifesaver for getting my application processed. They have a video showing how it works: https://youtu.be/Z-BRbJw3puU Definitely worth it to avoid losing benefits due to filing delays. You still talk directly with SSA, they just handle the hold time for you.

0 coins

Dylan Mitchell

•20d

That's a common perspective, but it's important to understand this isn't just about whether you personally live long enough to break even. In the OP's situation, she's specifically concerned about survivor benefits. Even if her husband doesn't live to 80, she likely will (being 5 years younger and female), and she'll have to live with the reduced survivor benefit for potentially decades. For single individuals or couples with similar earnings, the "enjoy it now" approach has merit. But when there's a significant earnings gap between spouses, the math strongly favors protecting the survivor with a maximized benefit.

0 coins

Fatima Al-Suwaidi

•20d

Thank you everyone for the insights! After reading all your responses, I'm going to have a serious talk with my husband about delaying his benefits until 70. The idea of using term life insurance to cover the "what if" scenario during the delay period is especially helpful. I'm still not sure what I should do about my own benefits, though. Should I: 1) Take my own reduced benefit at 62 2) Wait until my FRA at 67 3) Take spousal benefits based on his record when he files If I take my own reduced benefit early, will that affect what I get as a survivor later on? These decisions are so complicated!

0 coins

Dmitry Popov

•20d

Good questions. Your own reduced retirement benefit won't affect your survivor benefit. As a survivor, you'll receive the higher of your own benefit OR what your husband was receiving, regardless of when you claimed your own. If your husband delays until 70, you can't receive spousal benefits based on his record until he actually files. So if you need income sooner, claiming your own benefit at 62 could make sense, especially if you'll eventually switch to the higher survivor benefit anyway. One important note: if you claim your own benefit early at 62, and then your husband files for his benefit while you're both alive, your spousal benefit (the additional amount you'd get to bring you up to 50% of his FRA amount) would be reduced because you claimed early. However, this reduction doesn't apply to survivor benefits after he passes.

0 coins