Finfluencers call it a 'no brainer' to grab Social Security right at 62, despite the penalties — many experts disagree

But some social media “finfluencers” are flipping the script, saying that you’ll get more cumulative benefits if you start collecting as soon as possible.

“Taking Social Security at 62 is a no-brainer,” says Certified Financial Planner and Wall Street vet Taylor Sohns in a video viewed more than two million times on Facebook.

“The wait until 70 advice is not as smart as people think,” argues Tyler Gardner, a former financial advisor and portfolio manager with over two million followers, in a recent Instagram post.

The benefits of waiting past 62

While you can start receiving benefits at age 62, those benefits will be reduced by a percentage that’s based on how far you are from your full retirement age (FRA) (age 66 or 67), depending on your birth year.

Once you reach your FRA, you’ll receive your full benefit. But if you delay taking benefits even past your FRA, you will receive an additional 8% increase for each year you delay until age 70.

If you start receiving benefits before your FRA, the reduction in your benefit amount is permanent.

So, why are financial influencers urging people to take their benefits as soon as possible?

Sohns, however, bases much of his reasoning on a “break-even age,” which is the age when you’ll have received more total income by delaying than if you had started at 62.

“If I add up all the payments, I wouldn’t break even by waiting to full retirement age until I’m 79 years old. And the average American dies at 78,” Sohns says in his October Facebook post.

Gardner too points to the issue: “For me that crossover happens at 80 years old… So then I checked my expected life expectancy. It’s around 82. So the entire argument for waiting comes down to maximizing three years of more income, sacrificing closer to 18.”

In Gardner’s view, “Nobody attaches the appropriate weight to spending more money in your 60s when you're physically and mentally far more apt to enjoy what money can actually buy.”

A CNBC report does echo the break-even age, saying it “typically falls in the late 70s or early 80s.” It adds that the Social Security Administration (SSA) used to provide a break-even analysis for those calculating when to start their benefits, but it stopped doing so in 2008 because of “concerns from within the agency, as well as from external stakeholders and researchers, that it may distort claiming decisions.”

But experts say the break-even age leaves out other important considerations you should make when deciding when to claim.

“I continue to think a break-even analysis is the wrong framing for considering when to take Social Security retirement benefits,” said Jason Fichtner, a former SSA executive whose roles included acting deputy commissioner and chief economist.

Fichtner told CNBC that by waiting until age 70, you’d receive a 77% larger monthly benefit than if you had started at 62.

Instead of using the break-even framing, Fichtner said that “Another way of framing this discussion is to realize that claiming at any age before age 70 is a penalty.”

Other factors to think about

Guidance from the SSA about what to consider when it comes to starting your benefits states that “retirement may be longer than you think,” which is a key reason that experts advise waiting to start your benefits, if you are able.

If you simply look at your break-even age and compare it to the average life expectancy in the U.S., it could convince you that you should start your benefits as soon as you’re able; life expectancy for men is 76.5 years and for women it’s 81.4 years, so if your break-even age is in your late 70s, it could seem like a no-brainer to not wait.