Could The Retirement Age For Social Security Be Lowered?

With Americans retiring earlier, some wonder what it would take for Social Security to better accommodate beneficiaries' needs.

The average retirement age in the U.S. for 2025 was 62, according to a survey conducted by the Employee Benefit Research Institute. Many aren't choosing to leave the workforce; in a Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies survey, those who retired earlier than planned cited health reasons or job-related factors like layoffs.

While Social Security benefits can be claimed at 62, a retiree's benefits will be permanently reduced unless they claim at or after their full retirement age, also called FRA. The FRA for 2026 is 66 years and 10 months. So, would it be possible to lower the FRA to meet more retirees where they are?

Finding solutions for Social Security's funding will be essential in the coming years, as some beneficiaries live on fixed incomes and say they would not survive financially if their benefits were cut.

Gopi Shah Goda, director of the retirement security project at the Brookings Institution, and Emerson Sprick, director of retirement and Labor Policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center both said it was highly unlikely that the full retirement age could be lowered.

In fact, the opposite may be necessary, as the Social Security program is running out of money. By 2032, the main trust fund that helps finance Social Security retirement benefits is set to run out. After this date, benefit amounts will decrease by 24%, according to an estimate by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

In 1983, Congress tried to push Social Security's funding cliff back some by increasing the FRA from 65 to 67 in phases over 22 years. Some recent proposals to bridge Social Security's budget shortfall have included raising the FRA further.

Generally, in order to increase Social Security’s revenue enough to lower the FRA, there would need to be a significant increase in payroll taxes or a significant decrease in the benefits given out through the program. However, these changes would need to pass through Congress, which would be very unlikely, both experts said.

"None of these solutions are politically desirable. No one wants to be the one who is increasing taxes or reducing social security benefits,” said Goda. “The tax increase that you need just to make the program solvent is quite high.”

Social Security is running out of money because it is in deficit—meaning it spends more than it receives in taxes.

One of the main reasons for the deficit is that the U.S. life expectancy is increasing, while the fertility rate has fallen. That means retirees are receiving benefits for longer, but there are not enough young workers paying taxes to cover the costs.

“It just comes down to increasing the revenue into the program or reducing the benefits, or a combination of both," Goda said. "There are a lot of different ways to close the gap...but there's no like magic solutions. The money has to come from somewhere."

Experts and politicians have suggested solutions like raising the full retirement age, raising the payroll tax amounts, and capping or slowing annual cost-of-living adjustments.

The best approach would be a package deal, Sprick said, combining elements from each proposal to ensure the program saves money without severely impacting beneficiaries.

“[Social Security] provides really generous benefits for the highest earners, sometimes it's not adequate for the very lowest earners," Sprick said. "And so, Social Security provides a lot of dials to play with in terms of programmatic reform focused on solvency."