The article is misleading in several places. For example, it says there is a cap on benefits. There is no such cap. There is a cap each year on wages that are taxed for Social Security, and the amount of income taxed determines benefits. This leads to a maximum benefit (which depends on birth year). But it is not a cap on benefits. It is a maximum benefit resulting from caps on taxes. Calling it a cap on benefits makes it seem that rich people like the Bidens are getting a much worse deal than they are. The article also suggests that 85% of benefits are taxable for AGI plus half of Social Security above $34,000. That is where the 85% bracket begins, but you have to make a lot more to have 85% of total benefits taxed.
They could simply remove the taxable earnings cap and extend the 15% region, or create a new bend point and have a lower slope beyond it. In either case there would be no maximum benefit, but Social Security would benefit.
7 comments:
Is that surprising?
The article is misleading in several places. For example, it says there is a cap on benefits. There is no such cap. There is a cap each year on wages that are taxed for Social Security, and the amount of income taxed determines benefits. This leads to a maximum benefit (which depends on birth year). But it is not a cap on benefits. It is a maximum benefit resulting from caps on taxes. Calling it a cap on benefits makes it seem that rich people like the Bidens are getting a much worse deal than they are. The article also suggests that 85% of benefits are taxable for AGI plus half of Social Security above $34,000. That is where the 85% bracket begins, but you have to make a lot more to have 85% of total benefits taxed.
Well if the remove the taxable earnings cap, then it will become an actual benefit cap.
They could simply remove the taxable earnings cap and extend the 15% region, or create a new bend point and have a lower slope beyond it. In either case there would be no maximum benefit, but Social Security would benefit.
Not sure that would work. Would love to see the math on it though. It’s an interesting proposal.
How much are Donald Trump and Warren Buffett receiving?
Wouldn’t Biden be in CSRS, and therefore not part of Social Security, since he was a senator for 36 years, first becoming a federal employee in 1972?
Post a Comment