Biden Attacks Trump's Attempt To Defer F.I.C.A.

      From the Tampa Bay Times:

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden has a new message for Florida seniors: President Donald Trump’s latest attempt to fix the economic crisis could put their retirement at risk.

In a new ad that will air exclusively in the Sunshine State, Biden’s campaign accuses Trump of stealing from Social Security to pay for a new round of coronavirus relief. ...

The Biden ad equated Trump’s proposal [to defer F.I.C.A. for three months] to “slashing hundreds of billions of dollars from the Social Security trust fund every year.” ...

What Would You Prefer?

      The President announced that he would defer collection of the F.I.C.A. tax that supports Social Security between September and December of this year.  Note that the President only announced that the tax would be deferred. It would all still be due in January. It is not within a President’s power to cancel it. In fact, it’s not really within his power to defer it. 

     The employee’s part of that tax is 7.65% of gross payroll. If the President’s plan goes forward, employees will find themselves owing 30.6% of their gross paycheck in payroll taxes in January in addition to income tax withholding.

     So, let me ask you. Would you rather pay your F.I.C.A. month by month or would you rather have no F.I.C.A. tax for three months followed by a large balloon payment that eats up a huge portion of your salary, after the election, in January?

     And it's not just employees who may find this tax deferral of questionable utility. The vice president for government affairs of ADP says that deferring the F.I.C.A. tax requires "a little bit of a leap of faith on an employer’s part." You may well ask who is ADP? It's a corporation. They process payroll for 40 million workers and 800,000 businesses. If ADP doesn't defer F.I.C.A., there probably will be little deferring of F.I.C.A.

Trump’s Most Dramatic Attempt To Undermine Social Security

      From the Washington Post:

Another document signed by Trump on Saturday attempts to defer payroll tax payments from September through December for people who earn less than $100,000. The impact of this measure could depend on whether companies decide to comply, as they could be responsible for withdrawing large amounts of money from their employees’ paychecks in a few months when the taxes are due.

     Are we in a situation now where Republicans, no longer content with trying to undermine Social Security in subtle ways, decide to really own the libs by completely destroying the program’s finances? If Trump gains re-election does he dispense with ordinary American governance and rule by fiat?

Presidential Election Poll

bike tracks

Another Puerto Rico Development

     The First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on April 10 that it is unconstitutional to deny SSI benefits to U.S. citizens who reside in Puerto Rico. However, the case that the Court decided was something of an oddball. The Social Security Administration was trying to collect an overpayment of benefits that allegedly resulted when the claimant moved from the mainland to Puerto Rico but continued to receive SSI benefits. The claimant was the defendant in the action.

     There's now a District Court decision specifically involving claimants trying to get on SSI benefits. The U.S. District Court for Puerto Rico has held that a claimant cannot be denied SSI benefits because he or she resides in Puerto Rico. Martinez et al v. HHS. The Martinez decision also extends to other benefits such as food stamps and the Medicare Part D Low-Income Subsidy, which explains the first named defendant. The Martinez case is not a class action so Social Security isn't yet under an order to make SSI generally available in Puerto Rico but a class action is certainly coming.

     I'd really like to hear what is happening in Puerto Rico. Are large numbers of claimants trying to file SSI claims? What instructions have Social Security's field offices been given? Is Social Security trying to train field office employees in Puerto Rico on handling SSI claims?

     As I've said before, if SSI suddenly becomes available in Puerto Rico, there's going to huge numbers of claims filed. There's no way that local resources can handle the influx. Social Security will have to use resources from across the entire country to take the claims, make disability determinations and to process claimants onto benefits. Why do I have a feeling that Social Security management has no plan other than wishing and hoping the Supreme Court hold that it's OK to deny SSI to residents of U.S. territories? That may happen but I don't think anyone should feel confidence that the ruling will go that way.

Congressmen Ask For Review Of Phone Service And Process For Obtaining Medical Evidence

     From The Observer of Dunkurk, NY:

House Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee Chairman John B. Larson and Republican Leader Tom Reed have sent two letters to Social Security Administration Inspector General Gail S. Ennis asking for a review of SSA’s telephone service during the COVID-19 pandemic and SSA’s process for obtaining medical evidence for disability claims.

White House F.I.C.A. Insanity

     The President has been proposing that one aspect of a pandemic response be for the government to stop collecting the F.I.C.A. tax that supports Social Security. This proposal has received almost no support even from Republican legislators. Despite the requirement of the Constitution that the President "take care that the Laws be faithfully executed "the President's Chief of Staff is proposing that the President issue an executive order waiving the F.I.C.A. tax! Predictably, the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and the Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee have slammed the idea. However, the biggest reason that the idea of the President issuing an executive order waiving collection of the F.I.C.A. tax won't fly is that regardless of an executive order it would be crazy for any employer to not pay the F.I.C.A. tax. Any such action will be vigorously contested and would not stand. Employers would be reminded of the consequences of failing to pay the F.I.C.A. tax. There's a 100% tax penalty and that penalty is levied not just against a corporation but personally against the corporate officers. If you're an employer, you never, ever fail to pay the F.I.C.A. tax. Even if your finances are so bad that you're having trouble making payroll, you still pay the F.I.C.A. tax. Shut down the business and stiff the employees their last paycheck if you have to but never fail to pay F.I.C.A.!

     And, no, my Republican friends, this isn't just like D.A.C.A. Everyone concedes that the President has discretion in criminal prosecutions. No one in their right mind thinks the President has discretion to stop collecting a tax.

Beyond Parody

     In North Korea the Ministry of Social Security is the new name for the state police.