{"id":497692,"date":"2026-05-22T16:27:59","date_gmt":"2026-05-22T16:27:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/497692\/"},"modified":"2026-05-22T16:27:59","modified_gmt":"2026-05-22T16:27:59","slug":"finfluencers-call-it-a-no-brainer-to-grab-social-security-right-at-62-despite-the-penalties-many-experts-disagree","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/497692\/","title":{"rendered":"Finfluencers call it a ‘no brainer’ to grab Social Security right at 62, despite the penalties \u2014 many experts disagree"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

It\u2019s one of the most important questions that Americans have to answer as they near retirement: What age should you start collecting Social Security benefits<\/a>?<\/p>\n

Experts typically advise that you should wait as long as possible to start claiming your benefits.<\/p>\n

Must Read <\/p>\n

But some social media \u201cfinfluencers\u201d are flipping the script, saying that you\u2019ll get more cumulative benefits if you start collecting as soon as possible.<\/p>\n

\u201cTaking Social Security at 62 is a no-brainer,\u201d says Certified Financial Planner and Wall Street vet (1) Taylor Sohns (2) in a video viewed more than two million times on Facebook.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe wait until 70 advice is not as smart as people think,\u201d argues Tyler Gardner, a former financial advisor and portfolio manager with over two million followers, in a recent Instagram post (3).<\/p>\n

The benefits of waiting past 62 <\/p>\n

While you can start receiving benefits at age 62, those benefits will be reduced by a percentage that\u2019s based on how far you are from your full retirement age (FRA) (age 66 or 67), depending on your birth year (4).<\/p>\n

Once you reach your FRA, you\u2019ll receive your full benefit. But if you delay taking benefits even past your FRA, you will receive an additional 8% increase for each year you delay until age 70 (5).<\/p>\n

If you start receiving benefits before your FRA, the reduction in your benefit amount is permanent (6).<\/p>\n

So, why are financial influencers urging people to take their benefits as soon as possible?<\/p>\n

Sohns, however, bases much of his reasoning on a \u201cbreak-even age,\u201d which is the age when you\u2019ll have received more total income by delaying than if you had started at 62 (7).<\/p>\n

\u201cIf I add up all the payments, I wouldn\u2019t break even by waiting to full retirement age until I\u2019m 79 years old. And the average American dies at 78,\u201d Sohns says in his October Facebook post.<\/p>\n

Gardner too points to the issue: \u201cFor me that crossover happens at 80 years old\u2026 So then I checked my expected life expectancy. It\u2019s around 82. So the entire argument for waiting comes down to maximizing three years of more income, sacrificing closer to 18 (3).\u201d<\/p>\n

In Gardner\u2019s view, \u201cNobody attaches the appropriate weight to spending more money in your 60s when you’re physically and mentally far more apt to enjoy what money can actually buy.\u201d<\/p>\n

Story Continues <\/p>\n

A CNBC report does echo the break-even age, saying it \u201ctypically falls in the late 70s or early 80s.\u201d It adds that the Social Security Administration (SSA) used to provide a break-even analysis for those calculating when to start their benefits, but it stopped doing so in 2008 because of \u201cconcerns from within the agency, as well as from external stakeholders and researchers, that it may distort claiming decisions.\u201d<\/p>\n

But experts say the break-even age leaves out other important considerations you should make when deciding when to claim.<\/p>\n

\u201cI continue to think a break-even analysis is the wrong framing for considering when to take Social Security retirement benefits,\u201d said Jason Fichtner, a former SSA executive whose roles included acting deputy commissioner and chief economist.<\/p>\n

Fichtner told CNBC that by waiting until age 70, you\u2019d receive a 77% larger monthly benefit than if you had started at 62.<\/p>\n

Instead of using the break-even framing, Fichtner said that \u201cAnother way of framing this discussion is to realize that claiming at any age before age 70 is a penalty.\u201d<\/p>\n

Read More: Get rich from rising US property values with as little as $100 \u2014 and without the stress of angry tenants<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Other factors to think about <\/p>\n

Guidance from the SSA about what to consider when it comes to starting your benefits states that \u201cretirement may be longer than you think,\u201d which is a key reason that experts advise waiting to start your benefits, if you are able (8).<\/p>\n

If you simply look at your break-even age and compare it to the average life expectancy in the U.S., it could convince you that you should start your benefits as soon as you\u2019re able; life expectancy for men is 76.5 years and for women it\u2019s 81.4 years, so if your break-even age is in your late 70s, it could seem like a no-brainer to not wait (9).<\/p>\n

But, according to the SSA, about one in three Americans who were 65 in 2024 will live until at least age 90 \u2014 and 1 in 7 will live until at least age 95 (8).<\/p>\n

If you shift your view on Social Security benefits<\/a>, thinking of them as \u201cvaluable protection against outliving savings and other sources of retirement income,\u201d as the SSA puts it, the risk of starting early may become more clear.<\/p>\n

Certified financial planner Joe Elsasser told CNBC that only focusing on your break-even age can mean that you\u2019re not considering your full financial plan, including tax implications<\/a> and the rest of your retirement portfolio.<\/p>\n

Elsasser also said that for married couples where one person is a higher earner, they \u201creally should not use break-even as a decision point,\u201d because it could lead to a situation where the lower-earning spouse is left with a much smaller survivor benefit.<\/p>\n

When you start your Social Security<\/a> benefits is a highly personal decision that should be based on your specific circumstances \u2014 your health, your current and future income needs, your family situation and more.<\/p>\n

Although some finfluencers might say starting at 62 is the best decision, the right move will ultimately be making an informed decision based on your own personal situation.<\/p>\n

You May Also Like <\/p>\n

Join 250,000+ readers and get Moneywise\u2019s best stories and exclusive interviews first \u2014 clear insights curated and delivered weekly. Subscribe now.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Article Sources <\/p>\n

We rely only on vetted sources and credible third-party reporting. For details, see our ethics and guidelines<\/a>.<\/p>\n

U.S. News & World Report (1)<\/a>; Meta (2)<\/a>; Instagram (3)<\/a>; Social Security Administration (4)<\/a>, (5)<\/a>, (8)<\/a>; AARP (6)<\/a>; CNBC (7)<\/a>; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (9)<\/a><\/p>\n

This article originally appeared on Moneywise.com<\/a> under the title: Finfluencers call it a ‘no brainer’ to grab Social Security right at 62, despite the penalties \u2014 many experts disagree<\/a><\/p>\n

This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.<\/p>\n