NARSA survey: 73.5% of advisors say clients want early Social Security over cut fears

A NARSA survey of 189 Registered Social Security Analysts found 73.5% say their clients want to claim Social Security early specifically because they fear future benefit cuts. The group ran the poll in August; Financial Advisor Magazine reported the results Aug. 31.

The respondents hold the RSSA credential that NARSA trains and certifies. The findings describe what advisors hear in client meetings, not what retirees report about themselves. Almost 59% of those advisors said clients doubt Congress will act to fix the program's finances. Asked to name the dominant client mindset about when to claim, 62.4% chose "overwhelmed by conflicting advice."

Martha Shedden, who co-founded NARSA and has spent 15 years working on claiming decisions, told Fortune the pattern has become routine. "They hear their benefits might be cut 22%, and they're thinking, 'I need my money now,'" she said. The size of the share surprised her: "That was just really shocking."

Social Security's retirement trust fund is projected to run dry in the fourth quarter of 2032, one quarter earlier than last year's estimate, according to the program's 2026 Trustees Report. At that point the law requires an automatic, across-the-board benefit cut because the trust fund can no longer cover the gap between what workers pay in and what retirees are owed. Absent congressional action, the reduction would be roughly 22%.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has put that in household terms: a typical dual-income couple retiring just after insolvency would lose an estimated $16,900 a year, a single-earner couple about $12,700, and higher-income couples as much as $22,300.

The 22% cut the trustees project would reduce the average retired-worker benefit this publication reported for 2027 by about $477 a month. This publication reported on Oct. 14 that the 2027 cost-of-living adjustment of 3.6% lifts the average retired-worker benefit to $2,170 a month. That is arithmetic, not a household forecast: the 22% is an across-the-board projection, and the size of the 2027 raise does not determine the 2032 gap.

A worker who claims at 62 in 2026 would be 68 when the trust fund is projected to empty in late 2032, so the projected cut would arrive within the first decade of retirement.

Shedden's view, as she told Fortune, is that many of these clients would be better off waiting even after weighing solvency risk. The survey cannot settle whether the fear is rational for any particular household.

Two limits on the sample are worth stating plainly: the respondents are claiming specialists certified by the organization whose co-founder was quoted, and they are reporting on client sentiment rather than being asked to model outcomes. The 62.4% who described clients as overwhelmed by conflicting advice is therefore a measure of advisor perception, not evidence about how pre-retirees would behave after a single clear explanation of the 2032 mechanics.