Social Security at 62 or 70? Why Suze Orman has the stronger case for waiting.

Dave Ramsey favors collecting Social Security early and investing the checks you don’t need. Suze Orman generally recommends waiting until 70. Both approaches have their merits, but for retirees in reasonably good health who can afford to wait, Orman makes a particularly strong case. Delaying benefits means receiving a larger monthly check for the rest of your life, without relying on investment returns to make up the difference.

Consider someone eligible for $2,000 a month at full retirement age. Claiming at 62 could reduce that payment to $1,400, while waiting until 70 could increase it to $2,480. That’s a difference of $1,080 every month. Of course, waiting also means giving up years of payments. Here’s how the two strategies compare, where each makes sense, and what retirees should consider before deciding when to claim.

Ramsey’s Strategy Depends on Investing Early Benefits

Dave Ramsey’s argument starts with collecting Social Security sooner rather than later. If you don’t need the money to cover everyday expenses, his suggestion is to invest those payments and allow the money to grow. Ideally, that creates an investment account that can supplement your retirement income or eventually pass to your heirs. There’s an important catch, though. Simply collecting early and spending the checks isn’t the same strategy. You have to invest the money consistently, and those investments need to perform well enough, after taxes and fees, to compensate for receiving a smaller Social Security payment for life. Market volatility also introduces risks that Social Security’s scheduled benefits don’t carry in the same way. Ramsey’s approach can work under the right circumstances, but it requires discipline, available cash flow, and a willingness to accept investment risk. You can read more about Ramsey’s retirement approach here.

Orman’s Argument Focuses on Long-Term Income

Suze Orman generally recommends delaying Social Security benefits until age 70, particularly for retirees who are healthy and financially capable of waiting. Her reasoning is fairly straightforward. A larger monthly benefit provides more dependable income during the later years of retirement, when savings may be running low and the ability to return to work could be limited. Someone who lives into their late 80s or 90s could receive considerably more lifetime income by waiting. That doesn’t mean Orman believes everyone should delay, either. She has acknowledged that poor health, financial hardship, and the immediate need for income can justify claiming sooner. The goal isn’t simply to maximize the monthly check at all costs. It’s to make sure the years spent waiting don’t create financial problems that outweigh the eventual benefit. Orman’s own guidance explains why she generally favors waiting.

What Claiming at 62, 67, or 70 Actually Pays

The difference between claiming early and waiting can be substantial. For workers born in 1960 or later, full retirement age is 67. Claiming at 62 reduces the retirement benefit by 30%, while waiting until 70 increases it by 24% compared with the full-retirement-age amount. Let’s say you’re eligible for $2,000 a month at 67. Taking benefits at 62 would reduce that payment to approximately $1,400. Waiting until 70 would increase it to $2,480. That’s $1,080 more each month, or $12,960 annually, compared with claiming at 62. Put another way, the age-70 payment is roughly 77% larger than the age-62 payment. These figures assume the same earnings record and exclude future cost-of-living adjustments, but they illustrate why claiming age matters so much. The percentages come directly from the Social Security Administration’s early-retirement calculations and delayed-retirement benefit tables.

The Break-Even Point Is Around Age 80

Waiting until 70 produces a bigger monthly check, but there’s another side to the equation. Someone claiming $1,400 a month at 62 would collect approximately $134,400 before reaching 70. A person who waits receives nothing during those eight years, but begins collecting $2,480 monthly afterward. With a difference of $1,080 per month, it takes roughly 124 months for the person who waited to catch up in total benefits. That puts the simple break-even point around age 80 and four months. By age 85, the person who waited would have collected about $446,400, compared with $386,400 for someone who started at 62. That’s a $60,000 advantage for waiting. These are simplified calculations based on Social Security benefit factors, excluding cost-of-living adjustments, taxes, investment returns, the time value of money, and survivor benefits. Your personal break-even age could be different.

The 8% Delayed Retirement Credit Isn’t an Investment Return

One of the strongest arguments for waiting involves Social Security’s delayed retirement credits. Under current law, workers born in 1943 or later earn credits equivalent to 8% of their full-retirement-age benefit for each year they delay claiming beyond full retirement age, up to 70. For someone whose full retirement age is 67, waiting three additional years increases the benefit by 24%. That sounds like an impressive return, but it isn’t the same as earning 8% annually in an investment account. The credits aren’t compounded investment gains, and you’re giving up monthly payments in exchange for the higher future benefit. Investment accounts have their own advantages, including the possibility of growth and leaving remaining assets to heirs. However, they also come with market risk, fees, and potential losses. Comparing an investment’s projected annual return directly with Social Security’s delayed retirement credits doesn’t tell the whole story.

Working While Collecting Early Can Reduce Your Payments

Claiming Social Security at 62 while continuing to work can complicate the strategy of investing those early checks. In 2026, someone who remains below full retirement age throughout the year generally has $1 in benefits withheld for every $2 earned above $24,480. Different limits apply during the year someone reaches full retirement age, and special rules can help people who retire partway through the year. This matters because someone planning to collect early and invest the payments might not actually receive every dollar they expected. Fortunately, withheld benefits aren’t necessarily lost forever. Once you reach full retirement age, Social Security recalculates your benefit to account for months affected by the earnings test. The earnings limit also disappears once full retirement age is reached. Anyone planning to work during their early 60s should understand how Social Security’s earnings rules work before filing.

Married Couples Have More Than One Benefit to Consider

Deciding when to claim Social Security becomes more complicated for married couples, particularly when one spouse earned considerably more than the other. If the higher earner delays benefits, the resulting delayed retirement credits can increase the survivor benefit available to an eligible spouse after the higher earner dies. That can provide valuable protection if the surviving spouse lives for many years. It’s also important to distinguish survivor benefits from ordinary spousal benefits. A regular spousal benefit can generally reach up to 50% of the worker’s full-retirement-age benefit, but it doesn’t include the worker’s delayed retirement credits, and claiming early can reduce the amount. In many cases, the lower-earning spouse cannot receive a spousal benefit until the higher earner files. For some couples, claiming the smaller retirement benefit earlier while delaying the larger one may make sense. The Social Security Administration explains these benefit differences in greater detail.

Taxes Can Change Which Strategy Makes More Sense

The biggest Social Security check isn’t necessarily the one that leaves you with the most money after taxes. Depending on your filing status and other income, up to 85% of your Social Security benefits may be included in your federal taxable income. That’s not an 85% tax rate, but it can still affect your retirement budget. Withdrawals from traditional IRAs, pensions, investment income, and other sources can influence how much of your Social Security income becomes taxable. Delaying benefits may create an opportunity to manage retirement account withdrawals or consider Roth conversions before payments begin. However, Roth conversions can generate their own tax bills, so they aren’t automatically the better choice. The important thing is to compare your total projected income and taxes under each claiming strategy rather than focusing exclusively on the monthly Social Security amount. IRS Publication 915 explains how Social Security benefits are taxed.

Research Suggests Many Retirees Could Benefit From Waiting

The argument for delaying Social Security isn’t limited to financial personalities like Suze Orman. A 2022 National Bureau of Economic Research working paper by David Altig, Laurence Kotlikoff, and Victor Yifan Ye found that more than 90% of the American workers ages 45 to 62 represented in their model would benefit from waiting until age 70 to claim. The researchers also estimated a median loss of $182,370 in the present value of household lifetime discretionary spending from failing to optimize Social Security claiming decisions. That’s a substantial figure, but it needs context. The estimate represents a modeled household outcome, not a guaranteed additional payment from Social Security or an amount every retiree can expect to gain. Individual health, financial resources, family circumstances, and longevity still matter. Nevertheless, the NBER research offers a compelling reason to seriously consider delaying benefits before automatically filing at 62.

Claiming Early Can Still Be the Right Financial Decision

For all the financial advantages of waiting, claiming Social Security early isn’t automatically a mistake. Someone dealing with serious health problems or a substantially shortened life expectancy may have good reason to begin collecting sooner. The same applies to retirees who need the money to pay for housing, groceries, utilities, or other essential expenses. Waiting until 70 isn’t particularly helpful if getting there requires accumulating expensive debt or draining savings to an unsustainable level. There are also reasonable compromises between the two extremes. Claiming at full retirement age, or at another point between 62 and 70, may offer a better balance between receiving income today and increasing future payments. Ultimately, the right decision depends on whether the additional income from waiting justifies the cost of reaching that point. The Social Security Administration recommends considering health, employment, and other income when making that decision.

So, Who Has the Better Social Security Strategy?

For retirees in reasonably good health who can comfortably fund the years before age 70, Suze Orman’s argument for waiting is particularly convincing. A larger monthly payment can provide valuable protection against outliving retirement savings, especially for households concerned about income during their 80s and 90s. Dave Ramsey’s early-claiming approach has merit, too, particularly when Social Security payments are genuinely surplus income, investment risk is manageable, and building an inheritance is an important goal. Neither strategy should be treated as a universal rule. Start by reviewing your personalized Social Security benefit estimates at 62, full retirement age, and 70. Then consider taxes, household spending, other retirement income, health, and potential survivor benefits. There’s no financial advantage to delaying beyond 70 solely to earn additional delayed retirement credits, since those credits stop at that age. And remember that Medicare enrollment is a separate decision. Delaying Social Security doesn’t automatically mean you should postpone Medicare coverage.

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.