Podcast Center
Video Center
Webcasts
Resource Center
Events
By 
December 03, 2019 at 11:04 AM
The oft-asked question on whether or not to retire before full retirement age or delay it longer is answered differently for most people. Those at lower income levels may have no choice and take benefits at 62, the first year social security can be claimed, while those in higher income levels may wait until they hit 70.
Benefits increase the later they are claimed, but now a paper by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College cites key factors that may mean actuarial tables for social security benefits may be unfair due to changes to life in general: interest rates have declined, life expectancy has increased, and longevity improvement is greater for higher earners than lower ones. Based on these factors, authors Alicia H. Munnell and Anqi Chen analyzed what needs to be changed to keep social security benefits fair across the board.
(Related: 10 ‘Must Know’ FAQs on Social Security)
Today, those claiming benefits at 62 make approximately 20% less in monthly benefits than those who claim benefits at 65 (or 66 and two months if born in 1955 and after), which is full retirement age. In 1972, Congress allowed retirees to delay claims up to age 72, later reduced to 70. Today, the annual “bonus” for any delay after 65 (or 66 for those born in 1955 and after) is 8% in additional benefits per year.
In developing their own actuarial table, the researchers found that “the actuarial adjustment factors have remained constant over several decades.” But other factors have changed that impact the scheme.
First, life expectancy has increased. For example, women’s life expectancy today is five years longer than in 1956. Researchers found that those “who claim at 62 instead of 65 would increase their lifetime benefits by 14%. This smaller percentage increase suggests that a smaller reduction for early claiming would be required to keep costs constant across claiming ages.”
