If Social Security's funding crisis is the elephant in the room, this is the mouse everyone has overlooked. You have been warned.
By Quentin Fottrell
‘Delaying Social Security until 70 results in an increased monthly payment – and that comes with proportionally higher cost-of-living adjustments’
“No one is talking about the ‘mouse in the room.'” (Photo subject is a model.)
Dear Quentin,
The possibility that Social Security will run low on funds by 2033 if Congress does not act to prevent it may be the “elephant in the room” (“I will definitely claim Social Security early. Why do so few people talk about the elephant in the room?”). But no one is talking about the “mouse in the room.”
Delaying Social Security until 70 results in an increased monthly payment – and that comes with proportionally higher cost-of-living adjustments. If Social Security payments are reduced in 2033, I will still have more income than if I had filed early. A 22% reduction on $3,000 results in a higher payment than a 22% reduction on $2,000. In that scenario, I would be up $780 a month.
Mulling My Options
Related: I am a 63-year-old semiretired physician. If I saved $2 million for retirement, should my Social Security become optional?
You can email The Moneyist with any financial and ethical questions at qfottrell@marketwatch.com.
By emailing your questions to the Moneyist or posting your dilemmas on the Moneyist Facebook group, you agree to have them published anonymously on MarketWatch. The Moneyist regrets he cannot reply to questions individually.
Congress could exempt current retirees from any cuts to benefits – meaning it might be better to retire early – or could decide to protect lower-income beneficiaries, raise payroll taxes or even all of the above.
Dear Mulling,
You are correct.
But your scenario brings us back to the same place: You can claim Social Security early, say at 62, and get those checks while you still can but with a 30% permanent lifetime reduction. You might decide to do this because you think you will die relatively young, based on your own health issues and family history, or because you need the money, or because you believe Social Security is going to run low on funds in 2033. Or, as you suggest, you can wait until you reach your full retirement of 67 – or even 70, when you would get roughly 8% more for each of those three years – when you might see the same cut in benefits, but on a larger check.
If any future benefit reduction is applied at the same rate to everybody’s Social Security checks, delaying until 67 or 70 would indeed leave you with a larger monthly check, because you’d be starting from a larger base amount, and it would also increase the survivor benefit for a spouse if you were to die. However, no one knows what Congress will do if Social Security’s trust fund were actually to be depleted, as experts predict will happen in less than a decade. Legislators could exempt current retirees from any cuts to benefits, decide to protect lower-income beneficiaries, raise payroll taxes, or even all of the above.
No one knows what Congress will do if Social Security’s trust fund were actually to be depleted.
It only gets more complicated. If your girlfriend’s husband died before ever claiming his Social Security retirement benefit, she would likely be eligible for survivor benefits based on the amount her husband would have been entitled to at his full retirement age. However, if he claimed his retirement benefit before his full retirement age and later passed away, your girlfriend’s survivor benefit could be affected by the age at which he claimed. In other words, the survivor benefit is not always simply based on the FRA amount.
The problem is that everyone is seeking certainty – about their own longevity, about what will happen to Social Security in 2033 and about the security of their retirement – but real certainty doesn’t necessarily exist. Waiting until 70 is essentially buying into longevity insurance, similar to taking out a life-insurance policy. If you live well into your 80s or 90s, the larger monthly benefit can more than make up for the years you didn’t collect. If you die younger, claiming earlier may prove to have been the better financial choice. Some people have a better idea of what awaits them, healthwise, than others.
You make a good point about inflation and the benefits of waiting to claim. Delaying Social Security does more than boost your initial monthly benefit – it also results in higher inflation-adjusted annual increases. Because each cost-of-living adjustment is calculated as a percentage of your current benefit, someone who claims at 70 receives a proportionally larger COLA every year than a person who claims at 62. The percentage increase is the same for everyone, but the dollar amount is not. That could add up to tens of thousands of dollars over the decades.
Don’t miss: ‘I’m in my peak earning years’: I’m working beyond 70. Will that help increase my Social Security?
Structural challenges
Social Security faces two structural challenges over the next decade. The first is funding: Because the trust funds are invested almost entirely in low-yield government securities, they generate less income than they would under a higher-return strategy, putting pressure on reserves. The second is the lack of choice – workers cannot direct their contributions into the stock market, because the money is managed collectively. That’s by design: If another Great Depression struck, Social Security would, ideally, still be there.
Two trust funds do the work of supporting retirees and those who are unable to work anymore. The Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund pays monthly retirement benefits to eligible retired workers and their families. Eligibility is tied to a worker’s earnings history and requires sufficient work credits – typically 40, or roughly 10 years of employment. Public confidence in the system matters, because it rests on the government’s ability to hold and manage payroll taxes and meet its obligations as promised.
The Social Security Disability Insurance program, meanwhile, provides cash benefits to disabled workers and their eligible dependents. To qualify for SSDI, you must have sufficient work history and a severe, long-term disability. Both OASI and SSDI are funded primarily through payroll taxes collected under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act and the Self-Employment Contributions Act, which together support benefits for retirees, disabled workers and survivors.
The SSDI Trust Fund is currently projected to remain solvent through the end of the trustees’ 75-year forecast window (roughly through 2099, which seems like forever away). But after someone receiving disability benefits reaches full retirement age, their benefits are paid out of the OASI fund – and OASI is projected to be unable to pay full benefits starting in 2033. That means disability beneficiaries could feel the effects of OASI’s shortfall, too, although anything could still happen.
We are all gambling on the future. We just don’t use the same chips.
Don’t miss: I’m a senior who barely survives on $1,300 a month. No way could I live on $1,000.
Check out the Moneyist private Facebook group, where members help answer life’s thorniest money issues. Post your questions, or weigh in on the latest Moneyist columns.
Previous columns by Quentin Fottrell:
‘I claimed Social Security at 62’: At 76, I’m working at Walmart. Why do I still owe payroll taxes?
‘It’s heartbreaking’: My brother claimed Social Security at 70. He died from cancer after one payment. Why wait to claim?
‘I’d hate to end up with an unexpected tax bill’: I’m 73 and still work full time. Can I avoid paying taxes on my Social Security benefits?
By emailing your questions to the Moneyist or posting your dilemmas on the Moneyist Facebook group, you agree to have them published anonymously on MarketWatch.
-Quentin Fottrell
This content was created by MarketWatch, which is operated by Dow Jones & Co. MarketWatch is published independently from Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal.
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
07-31-26 0535ET
Copyright (c) 2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.