Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(135,865 posts)
Thu Mar 26, 2026, 01:53 PM Mar 26

A proposal would cap Social Security at $100,000. Will it fly?

A Washington think tank proposed capping annual Social Security benefits at $100,000 for couples as a way to shrink a looming deficit in the retirement trust fund.

The idea might sound reasonable enough: Only the wealthiest Americans can collect $100,000 a year from Social Security, a federal program that was meant to ease poverty, not pad wealth.

But the “Six Figure Limit” idea has drawn swift rebukes from retirement advocates, who see any cap or cut in Social Security benefits as a slippery slope.

The March 24 paper comes from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a centrist, nonpartisan think tank in the nation’s capital. It suggests a $100,000 cap on the total annual benefit for a couple at full retirement age, and a $50,000 limit for a single retiree, starting this year.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/proposal-cap-social-security-100-174013004.html

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A proposal would cap Social Security at $100,000. Will it fly? (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Mar 26 OP
Better idea: lift the cap on withholding Fiendish Thingy Mar 26 #1
BINGO!! QueerDuck Mar 26 #3
Then you have to lift the benefit cap as well Shrek Mar 26 #10
I Think That's A Canard ProfessorGAC Mar 26 #11
Sure, but it's a different sell politically Shrek Mar 26 #12
How about just raising the SSD withholding max level instead? kysrsoze Mar 26 #2
It depends on how SS is examined and who is examining bucolic_frolic Mar 26 #4
Disagree with this Johnny2X2X Mar 26 #5
Did you forget a zero? Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Mar 26 #7
I meant Per month Johnny2X2X Mar 26 #9
Cut The Crap- Raise The Cap FalloutShelter Mar 26 #6
Raise the F'ing Cap. It's not complicated. Nanjeanne Mar 26 #8

Fiendish Thingy

(23,285 posts)
1. Better idea: lift the cap on withholding
Thu Mar 26, 2026, 02:04 PM
Mar 26

If the withholding cap is lifted, SS will be solvent for the foreseeable future, for generations.

Shrek

(4,428 posts)
10. Then you have to lift the benefit cap as well
Thu Mar 26, 2026, 02:59 PM
Mar 26

The promise of Social Security as originally conceived was that you'd pay in during your working years with the understanding that you'd get it back during retirement.

If people are paying more while working with no prospect of a later return then it's just a straight transfer program and would lose a lot of popular support.

ProfessorGAC

(76,787 posts)
11. I Think That's A Canard
Thu Mar 26, 2026, 03:37 PM
Mar 26

I've been hearing that for decades, but I've never heard a good reason we why.
The cap could go up on pay-in, without increasing benefits using exact same logic that justifies progressive tax rates.
I simply can't accept that the ceiling on withholding can be raised with raising the ceiling on benefits.
It's lazy, Heritage, Heartland, Cato reasoning intended to cut off discussion about upward adjustments to the cap.
Been that way since at least the 80s.

Shrek

(4,428 posts)
12. Sure, but it's a different sell politically
Thu Mar 26, 2026, 05:11 PM
Mar 26

Going from "earned benefit" to "progressive wealth transfer" requires very different arguments to those paying the taxes.

kysrsoze

(6,446 posts)
2. How about just raising the SSD withholding max level instead?
Thu Mar 26, 2026, 02:04 PM
Mar 26

Problem solved, without screwing retirees over.

bucolic_frolic

(55,220 posts)
4. It depends on how SS is examined and who is examining
Thu Mar 26, 2026, 02:05 PM
Mar 26

Has it ever been closely compared to annuities? For the money you put in, what do you get back? You might win if you live a long life. But plenty of people put in and die young or die before they collect. I think the payment upon death is minimal.

If they cap payments as the article states, they might consider a lump sum payment like they do if you take a retire early offer from a company.

SS was started to help people with rent, heat, food in old age. Now on average they live longer. And SS is only part of the old age problem. There's also obviously medical care and the costs of household, caregivers. It's all become very complicated with all the laws enacted over the years to pay for it. COLA was not the greatest ideas. It should have been more generous with poorer recipients, with a smaller increase for the well off. IMHO.

There. That should start a fight.

Johnny2X2X

(24,224 posts)
5. Disagree with this
Thu Mar 26, 2026, 02:07 PM
Mar 26

Couple making $5K each from Social Security are not rich, this is money that is theirs and they paid into the system in order to collect.

Raise the cap on it, but keep the benefits cap the same.

Johnny2X2X

(24,224 posts)
9. I meant Per month
Thu Mar 26, 2026, 02:53 PM
Mar 26

$5K per month isn't rich.

The real rich get regular people to hate the upper middle class. People close to maxing out their Social Security benefit amount worked hard, they are not the enemy. It's the people making over $1M a year from other sources that don't need all their social security, it should be means tested.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A proposal would cap Soci...