4 Ways to Fix Social Security

4 Ways to Fix Social Security

iStockphoto/The Fiscal Times
By Beth Braverman

Social Security celebrates its 80th birthday today, and the popular program that provides paychecks for 44 million elderly Americans is in need of a safety net of its own.

As the amount claimed by recipients continues to outpace the amount of money contributed by workers, the system will need to dip into its reserves to keep up with its obligations by 2020. Within 15 years after that (if nothing changes), those reserves will be gone and the system will only be able to pay 77 cents on every dollar owed, an amount that will continue to decrease with time.

The problem is even more acute given that future retirees won’t have the same access to pensions that many current retirees use to fund their retirement, and younger workers haven’t saved nearly enough to cover the costs they’ll face when they stop working.

To close the projected gap, the country needs to raise revenue, reduce benefits or some combination of the two. Here are four of the most commonly proposed solutions:

1. Raise the retirement age. For most Americans, the full retirement age (at which you can get full benefits) ranges from 65 through 67. Advocates of this solution would reduce the amount the government pays in Social Security by gradually pushing back the age at which you’re eligible for full benefits.

The drawback: Many Americans are already forced into retirement before they reach age 65. If they claim early and receive reduced benefits they may not have enough money to meet their basic needs. Also, workers in physically demanding jobs many not be able to work those extra years.

2. Raise the payroll cap. Social Security is funded via payroll taxes, which currently are only levied on the first $118,500 of income. That means that high earners effectively pay a much lower rate toward Social Security than others. Hiking or eliminating that cap, advocates say, would create a fairer system and increase revenue.

The drawback: Critics of this solution claim that increasing taxes on middle- and upper-income earners would reduce their income and stifle the country’s economic growth.

Related: 6 Popular Social Security Myths Busted

3. Institute a means test. While the vast majority of recipients (80 percent, per AARP) rely on Social Security as an integral part of funding their retirement, extremely high net worth individuals don’t need the additional income. This solution would create a net worth or retirement income threshold over which eligibility for social security phases out.

The drawbacks: It could be politically difficult to settle on a threshold, which might vary depending on the geography of a recipient. Plus, this would require people to pay into a system from which they get no benefits.

4. Freeze the cost of living adjustment. Social Security payments have historically been adjusted based on inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index. This has been minimal in recent years, but the long-term, compounding effect of inflation makes this provision incredibly expensive.The drawbacks: For many people, Social Security is the only inflation-linked retirement income stream that they have. Limiting it could push some retirees over the financial edge as prices rise. 

4.2 Million Uninsured People Could Get Free Obamacare Plans

FILE PHOTO: A sign on an insurance store advertises Obamacare in San Ysidro
Mike Blake
By Michael Rainey

About 4.2 million uninsured people could sign up for a bronze-level Obamacare health plan and pay nothing for it after tax credits are applied, the Kaiser Family Foundation said Tuesday. That means that 27 percent of the country’s 15.9 million uninsured people could get covered for free. The chart below breaks down the eligible population by state. 

Takedown of the Day: Ezra Klein on Paul Ryan's Legacy of Debt

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump meets with Speaker of the House Paul Ryan on Capitol Hill in Washington
REUTERS/Joshua Roberts
By The Fiscal Times Staff

Vox’s Ezra Klein says that retiring House Speaker Paul Ryan’s legacy can be summed up in one number: $343 billion. “That’s the increase between the deficit for fiscal year 2015 and fiscal year 2018— that is, the difference between the fiscal year before Ryan became speaker of the House and the fiscal year in which he retired.”

Klein writes that Ryan’s choices while in office — especially the 2017 tax cuts and the $1.3 trillion spending bill he helped pass and the expansion of the earned income tax credit he talked up but never acted on — should be what define his legacy:

“[N]ow, as Ryan prepares to leave Congress, it is clear that his critics were correct and a credulous Washington press corps — including me — that took him at his word was wrong. In the trillions of long-term debt he racked up as speaker, in the anti-poverty proposals he promised but never passed, and in the many lies he told to sell unpopular policies, Ryan proved as much a practitioner of post-truth politics as Donald Trump. …

“Ultimately, Ryan put himself forward as a test of a simple, but important, proposition: Is fiscal responsibility something Republicans believe in or something they simply weaponize against Democrats to win back power so they can pass tax cuts and defense spending? Over the past three years, he provided a clear answer. That is his legacy, and it will haunt his successors.”

Read Klein’s full piece here.

Number of the Day: $300 Million

White House Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney speaks about the budget at the White House in Washington
REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
By The Fiscal Times Staff

Mick Mulvaney, the acting director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, wants the agency to be known as the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, the name under which it was established by Title X of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law. Mulvaney even had new signage put up in the lobby of the bureau. But the rebranding could cost the banks and other financial businesses regulated by the bureau more than $300 million, according to an internal agency analysis reported by The Hill’s Sylvan Lane. The costs would arise from having to update internal databases, regulatory filings and disclosure forms with the new name. The rebranding would cost the agency itself between $9 million and $19 million, the analysis estimated. Lane adds that it’s not clear whether Kathy Kraninger, President Trump’s nominee to serve as the bureau’s full-time director, would follow through on Mulvaney’s name change once she is confirmed by the Senate.

Why Trump's Tariffs Are Just a Drop in the Bucket

A Hanjin Shipping Co ship is seen stranded outside the Port of Long Beach, California, September 8, 2016. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson/File Photo
© Lucy Nicholson / Reuters
By Michael Rainey

President Trump said this week that tariff increases by his administration are producing "billions of dollars" in revenues, thereby improving the country’s fiscal situation. But CNBC’s John Schoen points out that while tariff revenues are indeed higher by several billion dollars this year, the total revenue is a drop in the bucket compared to the sheer size of government outlays and receipts – and the growing annual deficit. 

Bank Profits Hit New Record Thanks to 2017 Tax Law

iStockphoto/The Fiscal Times
By Yuval Rosenberg

Bank profits reached a record $62 billion in the third quarter, up $14 billion, or 29.3 percent, from the same period last year, according to data from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The FDIC said that about half of the increase in net income was attributable to last year’s tax cuts. The FDIC estimated that, with the effective tax rates from before the new law, bank profits for the quarter would have risen by about 14 percent, to $54.6 billion.