Retirement
at 62: Is Receiving Social Security Early Worth It?
By
Thomas M Dalton
JUNE 2006
- Millions of Americans are approaching one of the most important
financial decisions of their lives: to begin receiving Social
Security benefits at age 62, or defer those benefits until
older. Retirees can receive a reduced monthly benefit at age
62, and progressively larger benefits for each month the retiree
postpones benefits, up to age 70. Although many retirees don’t
have the financial flexibility to defer Social Security benefits,
those who do must compare the trade-off between receiving
benefits for a greater number of years versus the cost of
permanently reduced monthly benefits.
The
examples provided here outline methods of analyzing the
early-retirement decision. A simple analysis compares total
expected lifetime benefits depending on whether a retiree
chooses early retirement at age 62, normal retirement at
age 66, or delayed retirement at age 70. A more realistic
analysis compares retirees using early Social Security benefits
to defer drawing down on retirement savings, allowing those
savings to build for a longer period of time.
The
analyses suggest that in all cases except for those with
very low expected investment returns from individual retirement
savings, it is economically beneficial for retirees to take
Social Security benefits at age 62 and use these benefits
to defer taking withdrawals from their retirement savings.
Each retiree is unique, however, and all factors, including
those affecting individual life expectancy, must be analyzed
separately to determine the best choice.
The
Retirement Decision
According
to U.S. Census estimates, over 15 million people in the
United States will be crossing the minimum Social Security
threshold, age 62, over the next five years. Many of these
people will be compelled to decide whether to collect Social
Security benefits early or to wait until the normal retirement
age.
The
decision is among several options:
-
Begin receiving reduced Social Security benefits at 62,
or sometime between 62 and the normal retirement age;
- Wait
for regular Social Security benefits at the normal retirement
age; or
- Wait
even longer for increased Social Security benefits by
postponing benefits until after the normal retirement
age. At age 70 the decision is moot, because the monthly
benefit does not increase by postponing benefits any longer.
Identifying
the Lucky Decision Makers
Not
everyone has the flexibility to defer collecting Social
Security benefits. At present, a little over 72% of all
beneficiaries are collecting a reduced benefit because of
early retirement (see OASI Monthly Statistics, April 2005,
Benefits in Current-Payment Status Table 3 at www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/oasdi_monthly/
2005-03/table03.pdf). Many of these people have no choice,
due to economic reasons (e.g., they are unable to work because
of health problems or can’t find suitable work). People
who are fortunate enough to have a choice in the matter,
however, must decide whether it is more economically advantageous
to collect Social Security early, to collect at the normal
retirement age, or to delay after the normal retirement
age.
People
with the flexibility to make this choice can be divided
into two groups: those who will continue to work after age
62, possibly drawing additional funds from tax-deferred
retirement accounts; and those who will stop working altogether,
living entirely by drawing funds from another source, such
as distributions from a tax-deferred retirement account
after age 59 Qs . It’s important to distinguish between
these two groups, because those who collect Social Security
benefits and continue to work before the normal retirement
age lose $1 of benefits for each $2 of earnings in excess
of the specified limits ($12,000 in 2005). Once a person
reaches the normal retirement age, there is no loss of Social
Security benefits, regardless of earnings.
People
who continue to work after age 62 must consider the dual
downsides of receiving reduced benefits by collecting Social
Security before normal retirement age and also further reducing
benefits by earning income over the allowable limits. These
downsides must be weighed against the upside of using their
early Social Security benefits to delay the need to draw
money from their retirement savings. People who do not work
after age 62 generally need only compare the downside of
receiving reduced benefits against the upside of using Social
Security benefits to delay the need for drawing money from
their retirement savings.
How
Age Affects Social Security Benefits
A person’s
normal retirement age depends on the year of birth. Under
current law, the normal retirement age for people born in
1937 and earlier is 65. The normal retirement age for people
born from 1943 to 1954 is 66. The normal retirement age
for people born in 1960 and after is 67. People born between
these benchmarks have a graduated normal retirement age
per the detailed table in the “Retirement Planner”
on the Social Security website (www.ssa.gov/retire2/agereduction.htm).
The
reduction in monthly benefits applied for early retirement
is a sliding scale, ranging from a 20% reduction for people
born in 1937 who retire at 62, up to a 30% reduction for
people born in 1960 or later who retire at 62.
People
born between 1943 and 1954 (with a normal retirement age
of 66 years) reach age 62 beginning in 2005, and are now
faced with the choice of beginning Social Security benefits
early or deferring them to age 66 or beyond.
People
who defer collecting Social Security beyond their normal
retirement age will receive more than 100% of a full monthly
retirement benefit, depending on how long benefits are delayed.
For people who reach normal retirement age on or after 2008,
the increase for each month of delay is two-thirds of 1%
of the full retirement benefit, or an 8% increase for each
year of delay. For example, if a person would have received
$1,000 per month by retiring at his or her normal retirement
age of 66, that person would receive $1,160 per month by
waiting 24 months (to age 68) and $1,320 per month by waiting
48 months (to age 70) to collect Social Security. Delaying
benefits past 70, however, adds nothing to a person’s
monthly benefit. The percentage increase is less, on a sliding
scale, for people reaching normal retirement age prior to
2008, dropping to a 1% increase for each year of delay for
retirees reaching normal retirement age prior to 1982. A
table presenting monthly benefit percentage increases for
delayed retirement can be found in the “Social Security
Handbook” (www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/handbook/handbook.07/
handbook-0720.html).
The
Simple Analysis
One
simple way to compare the three basic alternatives—delay
retirement until age 70, begin benefits at age 62, or begin
benefits at the normal retirement age—is to ignore
alternative uses of the money. In other words, simply look
at which alternative gives the most cumulative amount of
gross benefits over the expected life of the retiree. Actuarially
speaking, a person who lives exactly as predicted should
receive substantially the same cumulative amount of benefits
regardless of the choice. Regardless of the statistics,
a retiree’s expectations of his own longevity will
drive the decision.
A spreadsheet
is the most efficient way to compare the alternatives. For
example, consider a person born in 1944, turning 62 in 2006,
with a full monthly retirement benefit of $2,000. Further
assume that Social Security benefits will increase by 2%
each year (per the annual automatic cost-of-living adjustment;
the actual increase for 2005 was 2.7%). Using the Social
Security tables described above, the yearly and cumulative
benefits for this person for the three basic alternatives
can be estimated and compared.
Exhibit
1 graphs the relative advantage of delayed retirement,
early retirement, and normal retirement at various life
expectancies. Without considering alternative uses of money
(e.g., delaying tax-deferred pension distributions), the
retiree in this example who expects to live past 81 years
will collect more lifetime Social Security benefits by delaying
Social Security collection until 70. If the retiree expects
a shorter life, collecting Social Security benefits at 62
will lead to a greater lifetime benefit.
The
relative advantage will change if the retiree in this example
collects Social Security benefits before normal retirement
age, continues to work, and earns more than the limit for
early retirement. There will be a $1 reduction of Social
Security benefits for every $2 of earned income over the
allowable limits until the retiree reaches normal retirement
age (see “How Work Affects Your Benefits,” SSA
Publication No. 05-10069, January 2005, at www.ssa.gov/pubs/10069.html).
Assume that the retiree in this example earns an amount
in excess of the allowable limits sufficient to decrease
his or her Social Security benefit at 62 by 25%, which would
mean earned income of about $21,000. Exhibit
2 illustrates that even with modest earned income at
age 62, there is very little advantage in collecting Social
Security benefits early. If the retiree expects to live
past 76, waiting until normal retirement provides a greater
cumulative Social Security benefit.
The
Social Security Administration estimates that men who reach
the age of 62 on average will live to just over 80 years,
and women who reach age 62 will live to about 83 Qs (see
the Period Life Table in Actuarial Publications of the Social
Security Administration, www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4c6.html).
Given the odds of living past 76 if a retiree is already
62, retirees who don’t need to collect Social Security
at age 62—and who plan to earn amounts sufficient
to cause a reduction in monthly benefits—should probably
defer collecting benefits until at least the normal retirement
age.
A
Realistic Analysis
A more
realistic analysis should consider the alternate uses of
a retiree’s money. Specifically, many retirees have
the flexibility of deciding whether to collect Social Security
early and reduce the draw on retirement savings, thereby
allowing undistributed funds to continue growing in a tax-deferred
account. The cost of this strategy is that monthly Social
Security benefits are permanently reduced.
Life
expectancy is not the only important variable in this analysis.
The expected rate of return on retirement savings is critical
to the decision. The higher the expected rate of return,
the more advantageous it is to leave retirement savings
alone by drawing a reduced Social Security benefit at age
62. Again, a spreadsheet is ideal for comparing the alternatives.
Assume
the same facts as in the example above: a person born in
1944, turning 62 in 2006, with a monthly Social Security
benefit at normal retirement age of $2,000, and expected
Social Security increases of 2% each year. Further assume
the following:
-
The balance in the retiree’s tax-deferred retirement
account at age 62 is $500,000.
-
Beginning at age 62, for living expenses the retiree needs
an additional $30,000 annually in pre-tax dollars that
will come first from any Social Security benefit, and
second from a pension distribution.
-
The $30,000 annual need will increase each year by a 3%
inflation adjustment.
-
The retiree’s gross income is high enough to cause
85% of Social Security benefits to be taxed, therefore
all comparisons are in pre-tax dollars, ignoring the tax-exempt
effect on 15% of Social Security benefits.
Using
estimated Social Security benefits calculated by the Social
Security Administration tables, the effect on the retiree’s
tax-deferred retirement account can be estimated under these
assumptions in the delayed, early, or normal Social Security
benefit scenarios. The analysis can be further expanded
to determine the effect of different returns within the
pension plan; in this example, 8%, 5%, and 2%. These returns
are roughly equivalent to what a retiree can expect given
a reasonable range of portfolio allocations, from securities
to savings accounts.
High
return (8%). Assuming an 8% return by the
tax-deferred retirement account, calculations in this example
indicate that the retiree will always come out ahead by
beginning Social Security benefits at age 62. The advantage
of leaving retirement funds in a tax-deferred account earning
8% far outweighs the loss in Social Security benefits from
early retirement. The enhanced Social Security benefit earned
by delaying benefits until 70 (i.e., the 8% increase in
benefits for each year of delay past the normal retirement
age of 66) doesn’t have much appeal. Even if the retiree’s
choice is between taking benefits at the normal retirement
age of 66 or delaying benefits until 70, the retiree comes
out ahead by delaying retirement only if she lives past
106. Exhibit
3 graphs the cumulative balances of the retirement account,
assuming an 8% tax-deferred return, versus life expectancies
under all three scenarios, focusing on this point at age
106.
Medium
return (5%). Assuming a 5% return by the tax-deferred
retirement account, the optimum strategy is early retirement
at age 62—unless an individual anticipates living
past 89. After that age, the strategy of delaying retirement
until 70 becomes increasingly advantageous. Exhibit
4 graphs the cumulative balances of the retirement account,
assuming a 5% tax-deferred return, versus life expectancy
under all three scenarios.
Low
return (2%). Delaying Social Security benefits
becomes more advantageous if the expected returns from a
tax-deferred retirement account are low. Exhibit
5 graphs the life expectancies at which delayed retirement
at 70 and normal retirement at 66 become progressively more
advantageous than early retirement at 62.
In
this example, if a retiree expects to live longer than about
83 years, it becomes more advantageous to opt for delayed
Social Security benefits. The downward sloping line indicates
that, at a 2% return, the earnings are not enough to offset
the withdrawals, and the retirement fund balance is decreasing.
Note
that the average life expectancy for men who reach 62 years
of age is around 80, while for women it is around 83 Qs
. In this example, therefore, a strict adherent to statistical
probabilities might advise a man to collect early Social
Security benefits, and a woman to wait until age 70 to begin
collecting benefits. It is more likely, however, that many
individuals will optimistically estimate their own life
expectancy as somewhat greater than the statistical averages.
Winds
of Change
The
issue of Social Security reform has been in the air of late.
Analysis of long-range solvency proposals and proposed legislation
can be found at the Social Security Administration website
(www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency).
Any legislation passed in the near term could affect the
retirees in the cohort described above by changing the early,
normal, and delayed retirement ages, along with the sliding-scale
tables that define monthly benefits. It is impossible at
this point to predict how significant any legislative changes
will be and whether they will affect individuals who are
nearing retirement and making the kinds of decisions discussed
above.
General
Advice for a Personal Decision
As
seen from the examples above, the decision to receive Social
Security benefits before the normal retirement age is an
individual matter, dependent on personal needs and assumptions.
The decision is relevant only to retirees who have the financial
flexibility to defer benefits until the normal retirement
age or beyond.
Even
though the decision is contingent on individual circumstances,
at least two general conclusions are apparent. First, it’s
probably not beneficial for someone who can continue to
generate substantial earned income to elect for early Social
Security benefits. The reduction in benefits for earned
income over the allowed limits greatly reduces the advantage
of receiving benefits over a greater number of years during
the retiree’s lifetime. Indeed, the one-for-two dollar
reduction in benefits is essentially a 50% surtax on earnings
over the allowed limits. Furthermore, the retiree’s
basic monthly Social Security benefit is permanently reduced
because of the early retirement itself.
Second,
retirees who intend to begin drawing on retirement savings
at age 62 should carefully consider the earnings rate of
their savings and whether it is cost-effective in the long
run to use early Social Security benefits in lieu of draining
their savings. Whether the cost of permanently lower Social
Security benefits is worth an extra three or four years
of benefits that are used to protect retirement savings
depends primarily on the rate of return in those investments
and the retiree’s expectation of longevity. Actuarially
determined life expectancies suggest that for all but low
investment returns, it is better over a lifetime to take
early Social Security benefits and use these benefits to
defer drawing down retirement savings.
Most
people, however, probably believe they can “beat the
odds” and live much longer than government-determined
averages. The actual decision for a retiree will very much
depend upon personal
perceptions.
Thomas
M Dalton, PhD, CPA, is a professor of accounting
and taxation at the school of business administration, University
of San Diego, San Diego, Calif.
|