Few retirement decisions matter more than when you claim Social Security. The age you file does not just affect your first check. It can shape your monthly income for the rest of your life, which is why the debate over claiming early versus waiting is so important.
For anyone born in 1960 or later, full retirement age is 67. Claim at that age, and you receive your standard benefit based on your earnings history. Claim before then, and your monthly check is permanently reduced. Wait beyond full retirement age, and your benefit grows through delayed retirement credits until age 70.
The difference can be huge. Filing as early as age 62 can reduce benefits by about 30% compared with claiming at 67. Delaying until age 70 can increase benefits by 24% above the full retirement age amount. For someone with a $2,000 monthly benefit at 67, that means collecting about $1,400 per month at 62 or about $2,480 per month at 70.
That is not a small gap. It is a 77% difference between the earliest and latest claiming ages, and the impact can add up over a long retirement. A larger guaranteed monthly check can be especially valuable for retirees who live well into their 80s or 90s, while claiming early may still make sense for people who need the income sooner or have serious health concerns.
This is where Dave Ramsey and Suze Orman split sharply. Ramsey has argued that many retirees are better off claiming Social Security early and investing the money. Orman has long favored waiting as long as possible, especially for people who expect a longer retirement. The numbers make one side look much stronger for many Americans.
Dave Ramsey’s Advice on Social Security
Ramsey advocates claiming at 62. His core argument is simple: the earlier you start collecting, the more individual payments you receive over your lifetime. Beyond that, he argues that retirees who invest their early benefits, rather than spend them, can more than offset the reduction that comes with filing before FRA. In his view, putting that money to work in the market neutralizes the actuarial penalty built into early claiming.
The Case for Ramsey in a High-Yield Environment
Critics of Ramsey’s approach argue that it forces retirees to gamble their safety net on stock market returns. But current conditions lend some credibility to his logic. The 10-year Treasury yield stood at 4.55% as of June 5, 2026, meaning early claimers can access meaningful risk-free yields without chasing volatile equities. Locking in that rate on early benefits reshapes the traditional break-even math, giving a conservative saver a legitimate way to hedge against the lower monthly payout without putting their principal at risk.
The Working Retirement Trap: The Earnings Test Penalty
A significant flaw in the claim-early-and-invest strategy surfaces for retirees who keep working. Under the Social Security earnings test, if you are under full retirement age for the entire year, the SSA withholds $1 in benefits for every $2 you earn above the annual limit, which is $24,480 in 2026. For a retiree counting on that monthly benefit check to fund an investment strategy, this withholding can eliminate the surplus entirely. The investment thesis only holds if the cash flow actually materializes, and for many working retirees, it simply does not.
Suze Orman’s Advice on Social Security
Orman takes the opposite view, arguing that 70 is the right age to claim Social Security. Her reasoning centers on the lifetime value of larger checks. A higher baseline benefit is especially powerful for retirees who arrive at retirement without substantial savings, a situation that describes a large and growing share of older Americans. Social Security is often the only guaranteed income stream in retirement, and the bigger that stream, the more financial resilience a retiree has for the rest of their life.
The Fixed-Cost Squeeze Supporting Orman
Rising fixed costs in retirement reinforce Orman’s argument. The standard monthly Medicare Part B premium is $202.90 in 2026, a jump of $17.90 from $185 in 2025. That 10% increase arrives alongside a 2026 Social Security cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) of just 2.8%. The Part B premium increase alone will eat up over a quarter of the 2.8% COLA for the typical beneficiary. For retirees relying on a reduced early-claiming benefit, healthcare cost creep erodes purchasing power faster than a larger, delayed benefit would allow. Orman’s case for waiting until 70 is, in part, a hedge against this structural squeeze on fixed retirement income.
The Spousal Coordination and Tax Safety Nets
Looking at Social Security in isolation misses some of the most powerful optimization strategies available, particularly for married couples. In a dual-income household, having the lower-earning spouse file early provides immediate liquidity while the primary earner delays until 70. That approach permanently locks in the highest possible survivor benefit, protecting whichever spouse outlives the other. Separately, delaying benefits can also reduce exposure to the so-called Tax Torpedo, a threshold where required minimum distributions and investment income combine to make up to 85% of Social Security benefits taxable. Early filers who also hold significant retirement account balances may find that higher income bracket quietly eroding their net benefit.
Ramsey vs. Orman: Who Is Right on Social Security?
There is no universally correct age to file for Social Security. The right answer depends on your health, your savings, your spouse’s situation, and your plans for continued work. What looks optimal for one retiree can be a poor choice for another.
That said, the broad data tilts toward Orman. Research from investment firm United Income found that 57% of retirees would come out ahead financially by waiting until age 70 to claim. That is a majority, and a meaningful one.
The gap between what the data recommends and what people actually do is striking. Social Security and SSI benefits for 75 million Americans increased 2.8% in 2026, yet the fear of leaving money on the table by waiting continues to push retirees toward early claiming. Only about 4% of retirees actually sign up at 70, while age 62 has historically been the single most popular filing age. Cash-flow anxiety, health concerns, and the psychological pull of getting “something now” routinely override the long-term math.
From a pure wealth-accumulation standpoint, Orman’s advice holds for most people. But the word “most” carries real weight here. If your health is poor, if you have limited savings and pressing expenses, or if you plan to keep working past 62 anyway, the calculus shifts. Filing at FRA or somewhere between 62 and 70 may fit your actual circumstances better than either extreme.
The most important takeaway is that this decision deserves genuine analysis, not a default. Run the numbers for your specific situation, and consider speaking with a fee-only financial planner before you file.
Editor’s note: This update corrects the article’s claim that Medicare Part B premium increases absorb “more than a third” of the 2026 Social Security COLA; research from the Boston College Center for Retirement Research puts the figure at over a quarter of the 2.8% COLA. The 10-year Treasury yield figure has been updated from 4.42% to approximately 4.55%, reflecting current market levels as of early June 2026. The specific 2026 Social Security earnings test threshold of $24,480 has also been added.
The image featured at the top of this post is ©ShutterstockProfessional / Shutterstock.com.