Social Security claiming explorer

Benefit basis. Alan's benefit is $3,950 per month at full retirement age 67; Diane's is $2,050 per month at 67. Both were born after 1959, so full retirement age is 67 for each. Claiming early reduces the benefit by 5/9 of one percent per month for the first 36 months and 5/12 of one percent per month beyond that; delaying past 67 adds 8 percent per year to age 70.

Cost of living. In today's dollars, COLA is assumed to match inflation, so benefits are shown level and the comparison between claiming ages is unaffected. In nominal terms, the COLA dial compounds annually from today, applied to both spouses and to the years before either claims, which is how the adjustment actually accrues. Because COLA is a percentage of the benefit, it widens the dollar gap between a larger and a smaller check over time.

Trust fund shortfall. The June 2026 Trustees Report projects the retirement and survivors trust fund reserves are depleted in the fourth quarter of 2032, with 78 percent of scheduled benefits payable from incoming revenue at that point; on a combined basis with disability the date is 2034 at 83 percent payable. The reduction dial models an across-the-board cut beginning in 2033, when Alan is 67, applied equally to both spouses and to every claiming age. Congress has never allowed a cut of this kind to take effect, and any fix could take other forms, so treat this as a stress test rather than a forecast.

Survivor case. After a first death, the survivor receives the larger of the two benefits for life and the smaller one stops. Alan's check is the larger one at every combination shown, so his delayed credits carry into the survivor's income permanently. The first-death dial starts at Alan's age 72 so both spouses have already claimed; survivor benefits are treated as unreduced, which holds at these ages.

What is not modeled. Diane's own benefit at 67 exceeds half of Alan's full retirement amount, so no spousal top-up applies at any age shown. No investment return is credited on benefits received and no portfolio drawdown is netted against them, so this compares claiming strategies rather than whole-plan outcomes. Federal taxation of benefits, which will be material at these income levels, is excluded. Ages are whole years, and Diane is 28 months younger than Alan, so her checks begin later on the shared timeline.

Planning horizon. Benefits are counted through the age set on the horizon dial, on Alan's timeline, with Diane carried alongside him. The dial reaches 120 deliberately: nobody plans for that today, but longevity is the single largest factor in which claiming age wins, and a horizon that long makes the point without argument. Longer horizons favor the larger check; shorter ones narrow the gap.

Bridge years. With retirement targeted at Alan's age 62 or 63, delaying him to 70 means seven to eight years funded from the portfolio, cash, and the pension at 65. That window is also the best opportunity for Roth conversions at lower taxable income, which is a second argument for the delay.