For federal employees, Social Security is not a “stand-alone” decision—it is one moving part inside a much larger system. Image: Lane V. Erickson/Shutterstock.com
By: Nigel Valdez, CFP
Most Social Security claiming strategies are built on a framework often summarized as L.I.F.T.S. (Longevity, Income needs, Flexibility, Taxes, Survivor considerations). Embedded within that framework—especially in popular software and online tools—is a simple break-even analysis.
For many retirees, that analysis may be directionally helpful. For federal employees, however, it is often incomplete and sometimes misleading.
How the Break-Even Analysis Works (In Plain English)
A Social Security break-even analysis compares two claiming ages—say age 62 versus age 70.
If you claim early, you receive smaller monthly checks for more years.
If you delay, you receive larger monthly checks for fewer years.
The analysis asks a single question:
At what age does the cumulative total of delayed benefits surpass the cumulative total of early benefits?
For many people, that break-even age falls somewhere around age 78–82. From this, the conclusion is often drawn:
“If you expect to live past the break-even age, you’re better off delaying.”
That conclusion sounds logical—but it rests on a major assumption: that Social Security is being evaluated in isolation.
Why Isolation Is the Problem
A break-even analysis only answers one narrow question:
How do I maximize total Social Security dollars received over my lifetime?
It does not answer the more important question most retirees actually face:
How do I maximize retirement security, flexibility, and overall household wealth?
For people whose only source of guaranteed income is Social Security—and who have limited investment assets—a break-even analysis may be a reasonable starting point.
Federal retirees are different.
Graphic: Better Federal Retirement
Federal Employees Are a Minority Case
Federal employees typically retire with:
A defined benefit pension (FERS or CSRS),
Substantial investment assets (TSP, IRA, Roth IRA),
And often multiple tax buckets (pre-tax, Roth, and taxable).
This means Social Security is not a “stand-alone” decision—it is one moving part inside a much larger system.
The Hidden Tradeoffs of Deferring Social Security
When a federal retiree delays Social Security, the income gap must be filled somehow. Usually that means:
Increased portfolio withdrawals, or
Continued work (full- or part-time).
Those choices create second-order effects that a break-even analysis ignores:
1. Portfolio Risk
Higher withdrawals early in retirement increase sequence-of-returns risk and may shrink assets below critical thresholds needed to sustain long-term growth.
2. Tax Interactions
Social Security is taxed under provisional income rules, which are very different from:
Pension income, and
Traditional TSP/IRA withdrawals.
In some years, Social Security income is taxed lightly or not at all. In others, delaying Social Security while increasing IRA withdrawals can unintentionally push a household into higher marginal tax brackets.
3. Asset Type Matters
Drawing from taxable accounts introduces capital gains considerations. Drawing from Roth assets reduces future tax-free compounding. Each choice has consequences that do not show up in a Social Security-only analysis.
4. “More Social Security” Does Not Always Mean “More Wealth”
It is entirely possible for the “optimal” Social Security strategy—when viewed in isolation—to result in lower overall net worth, less flexibility, or higher lifetime taxes.
A Better Question for Federal Retirees
Rather than asking:
“How do I get the most Social Security?”
Federal retirees should be asking:
“How does Social Security fit into my total net retirement income system?”
That system includes:
Pension timing and survivor elections,
Portfolio sustainability,
Tax bracket management,
Roth conversion opportunities,
And household-level planning (single vs. joint, survivor needs, legacy goals).
A Final Word of Caution
When offered a Social Security analysis, federal employees should always be mindful of potential conflicts of interest. Some analyses are genuinely educational. Others are primarily designed to support a broader product or asset-gathering pitch.
Because federal retirees sit in a unique category—defined benefit pension plus defined contribution assets—their Social Security claiming decision requires holistic, integrated analysis, not a simplified break-even chart.
Bottom line:
Federal employees are not “average retirees.” Their Social Security strategy shouldn’t be average either.
Nigel Valdez is a Certified Financial Fiduciary® and Federal Retirement Consultant® who specializes in helping affluent federal employees navigate complex benefits, taxes, and retirement income decisions. He is the founder of Better Federal Retirement™, a fee-only, fiduciary advisory firm.He can be reached at Better Federal Retirement™ | He can also be reached at nigel@valdezfinancial.com.
Senate Coming Down to the Wire on Funding for Most Agencies
Forced Distributions for All Coming for Current Ratings Cycle, Kupor Says
Average TSP Account Up about $20,000 in 2025; Roth Conversion Option Launching
Senate Bill Seeks to Reinstate Regular Telework at VA, Boost Benefits
What’s in a Name Change? For DoD, Up to $125 Million and Maybe Much More, Says Report
Pending Retirement Applications Top 50K; Bill Offered to Help Those Waiting for Full Benefits
See also,
Working Longer Makes Financial Sense, but Is it Really Worth it?