We REALLY need to lift the SS tax cap.

[Happy Hoosier]

Kind of a humble-brag, but with a purpose. I just paid my last SS tax for the year. I will effectively get a 6.2% raise for the rest of the year. Meanwhile, we are careening towards a cliff for the SS trust fund. This MAKES NO SENSE. I get the argument that SS is not intended as a welfare system. But it already has benefit "bend points" intended to replace lower percentages of income as income raises. The top-level "bend point" is targeted at 15% income replacement (it's progressive, though, so higher levels of replacement at lower incomes are blended with lower levels of replacment at higher incomes for a higher total replacment percentage). If folks want to avoid just adding more tax to high-earners while maintaining the benefits cap, just add another bend point and no benefits cap. Make it a 7.5% bend point. I'd gladly pay the additional amount to shore up the trust fund and the few extra benefit bucks would be welcome, I guess.

But either way, we need to eliminate the current cap. It's dumb. There is no reason for me to get another 6.2% income that I'll just put in my brokerage account, while people pulling in $1200/mo in SS are looking at a $400/mo cut!

[Autumn]

1. Lifting the cap is no longer enough.nt

[carpetbagger]

7. It'll be close.

In 2023 it would have provided solvency for 75 years. I don't think it would now, but combined with either un-enshittifying parenting (schools that are more than grammar factories, community structures for normal/"feral" children, day care solutions) or increasing immigration, we can completely close the gap.

[Grins]

15. It should be REMOVED! No cap! NM

[AllaN01Bear]

18. ding. this . this was a ron raygun era piece of junk.

if u r new to du. howdi.

[Fiendish Thingy]

2. Gonna have to kill the filibuster to do it

Keep that in mind when you consider candidates for senate you might support, financially or otherwise.

[Freddie]

3. Remove the cap but cap benefits

Unfair to the very rich? Boo hoo 🎻

[Happy Hoosier]

11. I'd be fine with that...

But some folks are reluctant to do that because "it turns SS into a welfare program." I persoanlly do not care. I'll be getting the maximum benefit (or very close to it), and while I am planning on SS for some segment of my retirement income, I don;t really need more than that. But some folks use that as an argument, and it's an easy one to fix.

[mopinko]

22. the problem w that

is the rich already hate it. they’ll come after it w all they’ve got. and they have it all.

i’ve thought for a long time, tho, that ppl shd b able to voluntarily pay more. if an employee says- i want to put in the max, they cd have their payments set at 1/52 of that max per wk. the employer wd have to match it. lower income workers can save more for the future, and their dependents get more if they die/become disabled.
i know it sounds like something no 1 in their right mind wd do, but it wd b very smart. ppl do buy insurance.

[Freddie]

25. If I can afford to have 6.25% deducted from every paycheck, so can the very rich

[Happy Hoosier]

26. Did you read my post? I agree with that.

But the arguments used against it are stifling our efforts to do something.

[Freddie]

29. You are unfortunately correct

I’m a payroll admin. I think most of us “lower” paid peons don’t even know that the highly paid get a bigger check mid-year. In my job I don’t really care what people earn but I still get p*ssed off when that happens. In a previous job a higher-up would stop by my desk periodically and ask when he’d go over the cap (and I had to smile and be nice about it). Planning to make extra payments on the Porsche? 🤬

[CousinIT]

4. I agree. Does anyone know whether raising the cap was in John Larsen's Social Security 2100 Act?

If we had a Dem Congress and POTUS they could pass that.

[LoisB]

5. I agree. At least raise it.

[OLDMDDEM]

6. Raise the cap to a reasonable level and add 2.0% (1.0% each to the employer and employee) to the amount

taken from paychecks and employer portions.

[Silent Type]

8. Obama tried to do just that, he was bashed by Democrats and his commission was branded the Catfood

Commission.

It would have improved payments to those at lower end of totem pole. So here we are, with an automatic cut looming in 2033 and GOPers in control. The Deficit has been in every Social Security Trust Fund Report since at least 2010. It's not new.

We might get a small FICA tax increase to kick the can down the road again, but there is absolutely no chance of removing the Cap. If we could essentially increase taxes 12.4% (6.2% X 2) we need it for healthcare, education, deficit/debt reduction, jobs, climate, and a bunch more.

[WSHazel]

9. Bad for small business

Raising the cap hammers small businesses and independent contractors. They have to pay both sides of the payroll tax.

[Happy Hoosier]

27. And NOT fixing this problem is bad for everyone else.

This isn;t theoretical. In less than 10 years, the poorest retireees are facing financial DISASTER.

[WSHazel]

32. There are plenty of subsidies that can be turned off to save money

Or we can go after plumbers and carpenters and gig workers. Sounds like you want to go after plumbers, carpenters and gig workers.

[Wounded Bear]

10. Raising the cap and the minimum wage would go a long way...nt

[ERW]

12. The Cap is so unfair to most Americans

The current cap is $176,000. Any American who makes that amount or less, pays SS tax on 100% of their income. Persons who make twice that amount pay SS tax on 50% of their income. Those who make three times that amount pay SS tax on 30% of their income. The more income you make beyond the $176,000 cap, the less SS tax you pay. It is so unfair! We need to remove the cap for fairness and to protect the funding of SS.

[GoodRaisin]

13. It won't happen. Our evil government is perfectly fine with letting the trust fund

run out.

[Mr.Bee]

14. They Won't Do It Because It Is TRUE!

It would fix it.
It would also prove we are a nation that not only takes care of its elders,
but also takes care of its citizenry!
Oh, that's so 1940s!

[patphil]

16. The cap is at 176 thousand now. Instead of going up a small amount each year or so, we should double it to 350K.

That will settle the issue for the foreseeable future.

[Auggie]

17. The ultra wealthy got that way on the backs of the working poor. They can return the favor.

Raise the cap.

[MLWR]

19. While I totally agree, I think I'll be happy

if Krasnov keeps his greedy paws off Soc. Sec. and for once in his miserable life, keeps his word.

[Jacson6]

20. No, We just need to raise the FICA tax by 1%

0.50% paid by the employee and 0.50% paid by the employer.

FICA is an insurance program for disabled and retired workers.

[IbogaProject]

34. I'd argue making FICA progressive

And adding taxes on speculation and other levies on the wealthy they need to start paying more of this.

[Thistle1233]

21. Not as Easy as You Think

See, here's the problem. Social Security isn't a tax, it's insurance; effectively a multi premium deferred annuity. If we were to lift the cap on contributions the commensurate offset would be increased benefits for those at the top, and the trust fund would remain effectively unchanged. Here's the rub. In order to accomplish what I think you want to do (raise cap, lower benefits), the entire Social Security system would have to be overhauled (legislatively). Republicans have been arguing for decades that SS is a tax, the Dems have always said (correctly) it's insurance. If it is to be made a tax and applied unequally across income/contributors then Congress will have to make that happen. Good Luck.

[Happy Hoosier]

28. You didn't ready my post, apprently....

I suggest adding a new bend point that reduces increased benefit for higher earners/contributors. They'd still get an increased benefit, but at a substantially reduced rate. The remaining additional taxes would shore up the trust fund.

[Thistle1233]

37. With respect.... I did read your post.

Thus my statement about the program being insurance and not a tax. Insurance cannot discriminate so there is no potential "bend point" where you can still charge people the same or an increased amount and not deliver the same benefits that other policy holders get. It's one of the quirks of insurance legislation. I appreciate what you want to accomplish, just saying there is no mechanism to do so without transforming the current system into a tax based entitlement program.

[Warpy]

23. The tax cap was applied mostly to keep people with power from screaming too loudly

about having to pay SS taxes, at all. It hasn't worked, they vote GOP and the GOP has wanted to destroy the whole program from the day it was passed and signed into law.

What we need to do is index it to inflation, which is a fact of life with any modern capitalist system. Another fact of life is GOP scheming to destroy any program that benefits human beings instead of corporations or great fortunes.

What we really need is a return to a progressive income tax, one indexed instead of in fixed dollar amounts that made everybody's taxes go up in inflaitionary periods. We need to start taxing these great fortunes because they have proven incompatible with a democratic republic.

[IbogaProject]

35. Need to have better taxes on unearned income

With a limited exemption for lower incomes line the current FICA wage cap. The wealthy need to start paying for the basic safety net, universal health care, social security, food stamps and eventually add in universal basic income. I know it is a pipe dream for now, but that is what is needed.

[DENVERPOPS]

24. I would classify that

as either a PIPE DREAM, or purely DELUSIONAL my friends, but any fantasy that gets you through the day/night is good for me........

[Happy Hoosier]

30. Congress will be forced to act sooner or later....

The question is how crapopy the end result will be.

My guess is that left untouched until the last minute, we'll have an increased retirement age, maybe an increase in FICO taxes, and no raised cap (other than the indexed increase).

[Fil1957]

31. Lift the cap on the SS tax, raise the top income tax rate to 90%, like it was in the 50s;

and cut the military budget by a third. The deficit problem is solved without cutting SS, Medicare or Medicaid. It's really not that hard.

[IbogaProject]

33. Why not a small tax on short term trading and a minimum tax on multi millionaires?

There are many ways to fix this including a federal tax on many of the wealthy scams like luxury property purchases and fine art resells.

[MineralMan]

36. YES! All we need are supermajorities in both house of Congress.

Enough to override a veto. Let's make that happen and then we can do so many things.