
There's a new retirement age for 2026 if you need to collect Social Security
Don't quit your day job — because Americans will soon have to wait longer than ever to retire.
For the first time since Social Security's creation 90 years ago, the full retirement age is set to hit 67 years old in 2026.
That is of course, if Social Security lasts long enough for you to reach that age, with new data showing the program is likely to run out of money by 2034.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act into law in 1935, creating an insurance program to provide workers aged 65 and older with a steady income in retirement.
Introduced to fight elder poverty, biographer Kenneth S. Davis described it as "the most important single piece of social legislation in the entirely of American history."
But next year, Americans will have to wait until they turn 67 before they can collect payments with no limitations.
Those approaching retirement face important decisions about when to collect their Social Security payouts — with the repercussions being significant and worth thousands of dollars.
Should I retire at 62, 65, 67, or 70?
When to start collecting Social Security benefits depends entirely on individual circumstances.
Americans can opt to take early retirement at 62 years old, though, monthly benefits will be reduced permanently.
Those born in 1959 will be the first group to face a full retirement age of exactly 67 and each year a claimant waits past the FRA permanently increases their benefit (until 70).
Using a FRA of 67 and a base monthly benefit of $1,800, here's how the numbers play out.
Americans turning 62 next year – the first age group that can claim Social Security benefits – would receive just 70 percent of the full amount, or $1,260 per month, if they begin early retirement.
At age 65, the benefit rises to roughly 87 percent of the full benefit, or $1,560.
Retiring at 67 unlocks the full benefit of $1,800.
For those who delay retirement until age 70, monthly payments climb to an estimated $2,323, around 124 percent of the base amount.
Benefits no longer increase after becoming a septuagenarian.
Why did the law change?
The new retirement age did not happen overnight and has been climbing gradually after Congress passed a set of reforms which were signed into law by President Ronald Reagan more than four decades ago.
While the Social Security Act was born in the depths of the Great Depression, its 1983 amendment came amid another era of economic strain.
The system was on the brink of financial collapse after the U.S. had experienced back-to-back recessions. Benefit payouts began to exceed income, meaning Social Security, as it stood, was no longer sustainable.
The original act was designed when life expectancy in the U.S. was just 61 years, so there were vastly fewer retirees and benefits would not have been collected as long.
By 1983, Americans were living much longer, with the average life expectancy over 74 years (79 today). The ratio of active workers to retirees also shrank dramatically, from 42 to 1 to 3.6 to 1 (2.7:1 today).
The law change meant that people turning 65 in 1990 were the last to have a full retirement age of exactly 65. Starting in 1991, the full retirement age increased by two months each year, meaning those turning 65 in 1991 had to wait until 65 years and 2 months; in 1992 it was 65 years and 4 months, and so on.
From 1996 to 2007, anyone turning 65 had an full retirement age of 66 years. After that, the retirement age continued rising by two-month increments until it reached 67 for those turning 65 in 2026 and beyond.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
39 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
FLOURISHING AFTER 50: My son, his partner and their kids have moved in with us to save - but now they want our money as well
Dear Vanessa, Our son is 32 with two young children. He and his partner have been renting for years, but with the cost of everything going up, they can't seem to get ahead. They've been slowly saving for a house deposit but it could take years. Recently, they asked if they could move in with us for a while to save more money. We agreed - it makes sense and we want to support them where we can. But now our son has taken it a step further and asked if we would consider contributing to their deposit so they can buy sooner. My husband and I are both 61 and still working. We've got retirement savings and some extra put aside, but we're not retired yet - and we don't have unlimited resources. My husband is very cautious and thinks helping financially is a bad idea. He's worried that once the money is gone, we won't get it back - and we might end up needing it down the track. I can see both sides, and I'm torn. We want to help, but not at the expense of our own future. What's the right thing to do? Christine. Dear Christine, You've described a dilemma so many families are facing right now. With housing unaffordability, high living costs, and interest rates biting, adult children are under enormous financial pressure- and often, their first thought is to turn to mum and dad. It's understandable. You're the generation who built up savings, paid down debt, and likely bought property at a more achievable price. To your children, you may look financially secure. But what they often don't realise is that retirement is getting more expensive, we're all living longer, and your money has to stretch much further than it used to. Opening your home to help them save is already a generous act - and likely to be a huge help. But giving away money, especially before you've even retired, is a completely different decision. Once you gift a lump sum, it's usually gone for good. And if something changes - your health, your job, or even their relationship - you can't always get it back. That doesn't mean you can't help. But it does mean being crystal clear about what you can safely afford to give, and what impact it will have on your lifestyle for the next 20 or 30 years. That's where a conversation with a good financial adviser can make all the difference. They can model what a gift or loan would do to your future income and help you structure it properly, so it's protected. For example, if your son and his partner were to split up, would you want your contribution to be part of a legal agreement or loan that's repaid? Or is this money a gift with no expectations? These are emotional decisions, but they have real financial consequences. And just as importantly, you and your husband need to be on the same page. If one of you feels uneasy, that's a sign to slow down and gather more information before making any commitments. Money given under pressure or guilt often causes long-term resentment - especially if it later affects your ability to live the retirement you planned. If you need help finding an adviser in your area, I offer a free referral service to connect you with someone experienced and independent. Supporting your family is a wonderful thing - but so is securing your own future, so you can enjoy your retirement, your freedom, and the time you've earned with your grandkids.


The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Huge carmaker ‘may sell iconic luxury motor brand' as sales dive and new CEO takes charge
ONE of the world's largest car manufacturers looks set to sell an iconic sports car brand as sales plummet. Discussions over the future of Maserati remain ongoing as industry giant Stellantis prepares to welcome its new CEO in the coming days. 5 5 The French-Italian company could be forced to sell the luxury car brand on the back of poor sales over the past year. New CEO Antonio Filosa - who starts on Monday after being appointed last month - faces huge financial decisions as a result of President Trump's brutal trade tariffs. Stellantis - which owns 14 brands across the globe - was reported to have hired management consulting firm McKinsey and Co to review the situation. McKinsey was called in April this year to advise on struggling brands Maserati and Alfa Romeo, with both experiencing a dire 2024. Last year, the number of Maserati units sold plunged from 26,600 to just 11,300. Stellanis told Motor1: "McKinsey has been asked to provide its considerations regarding the recently announced U.S. tariffs for Alfa Romeo and Maserati." Trump's new legislation means tariffs of at least 25 percent on anything imported into the US. Maserati has no new model launches scheduled as it waits for a new business plan, with the last one having been put on hold by Stellantis in 2024. The plan is expected to be presented soon after Filosa starts his new role. But as things stand, it is understood that all options remain on the table for the world-renowned Italian brand. It came after the global firm pulled the plug on a £1.3billion investment in Maserati earlier this year. Plans for the hotly anticipated electric MC20 Folgore were also binned due to low demand. WHO ARE STELLANTIS? The EV, which translates to 'lightning' in Italian, was intended to be the brand's electric alternative to the stunning MC20 sports car. It promised a power output and performance characteristics similar to the existing V6-engined MC20. The Folgore was set to be one of six Maserati EVs set for launch over the next year or so. But Stellantis chief financial officer Doug Ostermann said they had pulled the plug on Maserati projects, claiming they wanted to review the pace in which sports car owners move over to EVs. He said: "We have to recognise the dynamics in that business, particularly in the Chinese market, and our expectations in terms of how quickly that luxury market would transition to electrification." What is Stellantis? Stellantis is the company behind iconic motor brands such as Fiat, Vauxhall and Peugot. The conglomerate, which is the second-largest maker of cars in Europe, owns 14 badges, including Chrysler, Citroen, Jeep and Maserati. The company itself is the product of a merger between Fiat-Chrysler and France's PSA, the maker of Peugeot and Citroen, in 2021. But the motoring giant has encountered increasingly stuttering financial success. And an initial manufacturing break at Stellantis has now been extended as bosses report a collapse in demand for electric cars. Other projects, including EV replacements for the Levante and Quattroporte models, are in danger of being cancelled too. The vehicles were set to be released in 2027 and 2028 respectively. It is understood the three models would have been Maserati's electric line-up as the firm looked to adapt to the EV revolution. Before he left the firm last year, Stellantis boss Carlos Tavares claimed the low sales at Maserati were due to advertising issues. He told Top Gear: "Maserati is in the red. The reason is marketing. "The Maserati brand is not clearly positioned and the storytelling is not how it should be. "The brand is not just about sports cars, it's about gran turismo, it's about quality of life, dolce vita and technology." 5 5


Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Russia says ready to supply LNG to Mexico
MEXICO CITY, June 21 (Reuters) - Russia is ready to supply liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Mexico and share energy sector technologies, the Russian embassy in Mexico said on Saturday on X. "We are already working with Mexico. We have excellent LNG technologies, and we are ready to share these technologies and supply LNG as well," Russian Energy Minister Sergei Tsivilev said. Russia is prepared to offer oil extraction technologies suited for challenging geological conditions, as well as solutions aimed at improving the efficiency of oil processing, the embassy added.