A growing number of Americans are opting to claim Social Security benefits before reaching the age that would maximize their monthly payments, according to new research from Schroders.
Drawing from its 2025 US Retirement Survey, which polled 1,500 investors nationwide, Schroders found that while most non-retired Americans understand the financial advantages of waiting, only a small fraction intend to delay claiming until age 70.
The survey revealed that 44% of non-retirees plan to file for Social Security before age 67, the full retirement age for those born in 1960 or later. Just 10% expect to wait until age 70, when benefits reach their maximum. This is despite 70% of respondents acknowledging that waiting would increase their monthly payments.
The reasons for claiming early are varied. Thirty-seven percent of respondents said they want access to the money as soon as possible, while 36% cited concerns that Social Security may run out of funds or stop making payments. Another 34% anticipate needing the money earlier for regular income, and 15% said they were advised to take benefits before age 70.
“The income generated from monthly Social Security payments is critical to making ends meet in retirement for many Americans,” said Deb Boyden, head of US defined contribution at Schroders. She added that ongoing reports about Social Security’s solvency are making workers anxious to access their benefits sooner, even though delaying could have a significant impact on their retirement finances.
The survey also shed new light on widespread anxiety about retirement income. Eighty-seven percent of non-retired Americans expressed at least some concern about generating income in retirement, and more than half are worried about outliving their assets. On average, non-retirees believe they will need $5,032 per month to retire comfortably, drawing from a mix of Social Security, cash savings, workplace retirement plans, and investment income.
Despite these concerns, many Americans are not confident they will be able to replace a substantial portion of their pre-retirement income. Only 11% of non-retirees said they are certain they will replace at least three-quarters of their last paycheck, while 39% said it is probable. Thirty-five percent said it is probably not likely, and 15% said it is definitely not likely. More than half described the prospect of losing regular paychecks as “concerning,” and nearly one-fourth called it “terrifying.”
Among retirees, uncertainty persists. Sixty-two percent said they do not know how long their savings will last, and 58% wish they had done more planning. Nearly three-quarters of retirees generate less than 75% of their last paycheck in monthly income, and almost half live on less than half of their pre-retirement income. About half of retirees surveyed do not have a specific strategy for generating income, with systematic withdrawals, certificates of deposit, and dividend-producing investments among the most common approaches.
“Many Americans do not manage their retirement savings as effectively as they could, and as a result, they must make tough choices when beginning to withdraw assets to cover their expenses,” Boyden said.
As concerns about Social Security’s long-term solvency grow, policymakers are weighing a range of proposals to shore up the program. One option, advanced by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget on Tuesday, would cap annual cost-of-living adjustments for higher earners. Under this approach, all beneficiaries would continue to receive a COLA, but the increase would be limited for those with the largest benefits and highest lifetime incomes. For example, if the cap were set at the 75th percentile of benefits, only the top quarter of beneficiaries would see their COLA limited, while most retirees would receive the same adjustment as under current law.
Analysis from the Urban Institute suggests that such a cap could close about one-tenth of Social Security’s long-term funding gap and save $115 billion over a decade. The impact would be concentrated among higher earners, with benefits for the top quintile reduced by about 6% in 2055, while lower earners would see little or no change. The proposal is designed to increase the program’s progressivity and retain inflation protection for the majority of retirees. Policymakers could adjust the cap’s level to achieve different savings or distributional outcomes, and the measure could be paired with other reforms to further extend the program’s solvency.
The Social Security Administration is expected to announce the 2026 cost-of-living adjustment later this month, with recent predictions pointing to a modest increase of about 2.7%. The debate over how to ensure the program’s sustainability is likely to intensify as the trust fund approaches depletion within the next decade.
“It’s time for an economic reset,” wrote the California governor, in a post on X.
Masterworks was launched in 2017 but its RIA, Masterworks Advisers, is just three years old.
One 2017 form, no broker license, and a $42 million gap they say surfaced on a webinar.
Fewer than half of Americans in their peak earning years feel on track for retirement, while many say limited financial knowledge and access to professional guidance are holding them back.
Meanwhile, Wells Fargo hauled advisors overseeing $825 million in the West Coast, while Wedbush has welcomed a seasoned professional from Stifel in California.
Dan Biagini of American Equity says the steady decline of pensions, longer lifespans and a reset in interest rates are rewriting how advisors build retirement income
Direct indexing is on pace to outgrow ETFs and mutual funds. Northern Trust's Ken Lassner explains why the advisors who get it wish they had started sooner.
