They planned to claim Social Security at 67. Our modeling found a hypothetical $127,000 more in lifetime household income.

Married couple. Both 63. Healthy. Both still working. Their plan was to claim at full retirement age. It seemed reasonable.

What the coordinated model showed

If she, the lower earner, claimed at 63 and he, the higher earner, delayed to 70:

  • Their household income floor went up by $847 per month from her claiming early.
  • His benefit at 70 was modeled at $3,340 per month versus $2,520 at full retirement age—a 32% permanent increase.
  • Her modeled survivor benefit, if he predeceased her, rose from $2,520 to $3,340 for the rest of her life.
  • Assuming both lived to 85, modeled lifetime household income was $127,000 higher than both claiming at 67.

They had never thought of it as a coordinated decision. They had never modeled the survivor-benefit impact. They had picked 67 because it sounded right.

The difference between “sounded right” and “run the math” was a modeled $127,000.

Have you modeled your household's Social Security strategy?