Connect with us

Personal Finance

How Biden, Harris and Trump would change Social Security and Medicare

Published

on

A voter fills out a ballot at a polling station on Election Day in Falls Church, Virginia, U.S., November 7, 2023. 

Kevin Lamarque | Reuters

When it comes to the November election, there is one issue that is at the top of voters’ wish lists: Social Security.

Despite political division, most Americans — 87% — want action to address Social Security’s trust fund shortfall, according to the National Institute on Retirement Security. The group polled 1,208 individuals aged 25 and older.

Meanwhile, 69% of Americans said a candidate’s stance on Social Security will be a major factor in how they vote in the presidential election, according to Nationwide Retirement Institute.

It polled 1,831 adults age 18 and up who “currently receive or expect to receive Social Security.”

While experts mostly agree a fix is needed, they are divided on how that should happen — whether it be through tax increases, benefit cuts or a combination of both.

The deadline to fix the programs will only grow more urgent during the next presidential administration.

“If something is going to happen before the eleventh hour, it is going to require presidential leadership,” said Emerson Sprick, associate director of the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Economic Policy Program. “That’s something we haven’t seen on this issue for a very long time.”

Projected depletion dates are looming

The latest projections from the Social Security trustees estimate the program’s combined funds may run out in 2035. At that time, just 83% of benefits may be payable. The projected depletion date for the trust fund used to pay retirement benefits is even sooner in 2033.

Medicare also faces a looming depletion date for its hospital insurance fund, which is projected to be able to pay 100% of benefits until 2036.

It is up to lawmakers to address the shortfalls before the projected depletion dates, when the programs will face across-the-board benefit cuts.

More from Personal Finance:
How a Harris presidency could shape a middle-class tax credit
JD Vance once called on GOP to fight student loan forgiveness
What a Kamala Harris administration could mean for your wallet

The looming depletion dates come as the programs face other pressures.

Retirees are now reaching “peak 65” — with more than 11,200 individuals turning 65 every day.

As more individuals rely on Social Security and Medicare, the gross national debt has now climbed to a record $35 trillion.

“We should fix our dangerously close to insolvent Social Security and Medicare trust funds,” Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said in a statement.

Biden can ‘show leadership’ before presidency ends

U.S. President Joe Biden is flanked by family members as he speaks about the release of Americans detained in Russia during brief remarks at the White House in Washington, U.S., August 1, 2024. 

Nathan Howard | Reuters

While the focus is on the presidential campaigns, President Joe Biden still has a window of opportunity to work to address Social Security and Medicare.

“Biden has a really fantastic opportunity, if he wants to get the ball rolling and show some leadership on the issue in the lame duck,” Sprick said.

Some Democrats have proposed raising taxes for the wealthy and increasing benefits.

Meanwhile, a bipartisan group of lawmakers has proposed forming a commission to identify next steps. But those efforts like those have yet to prompt action, which would likely require compromises.

“The folks in Congress need leadership and a little bit of cover from the top of the ticket,” Sprick said.

Biden publicly vowed to protect Social Security and Medicare and “make the wealthy pay their fair share” during his March State of the Union address.

“We could extend the life of Medicare’s Trust Fund permanently — without cutting benefits — if Congressional Republicans would get on board with the President’s historic budget proposal to raise taxes on the wealthy,” said White House spokesperson Robyn Patterson.

“The President’s budget also clearly states his principles for strengthening Social Security,” Patterson said. “He looks forward to working with Congress to responsibly strengthen Social Security by ensuring that high-income individuals pay their fair share, without increasing taxes on anyone making less than $400,000 or cutting benefits.”

Trump wants to eliminate some Social Security taxes

Republican presidential nominee and former U.S. President Donald Trump holds a campaign rally in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, U.S., July 31, 2024. 

Elizabeth Frantz | Reuters

Former President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social on Thursday, in all capital letters, “Seniors should not pay tax on Social Security!”

Experts say the post likely refers to the taxes Social Security beneficiaries may owe on their benefit income. The Trump campaign did not return a request for comment by press time.

Exactly how much Social Security beneficiaries pay in taxes is based on their “combined income,” which includes adjusted gross income, nontaxable interest and half of their Social Security benefits.

For individuals with $25,000 to $34,000 in combined income — or married couples who file jointly with between $32,000 and $44,000 — up to 50% of benefits are taxed.

For individuals with more than $34,000 in combined income — or married couples with more than $44,000 — up to 85% of benefits may be taxable.

Former President Donald Trump on entitlements: There's tremendous numbers of things you can do

Those thresholds are not adjusted for inflation. Consequently, as time passes and benefit income increases, more beneficiaries are liable for taxes on their benefits.

Nixing those levies would allow beneficiaries to keep more of their benefit income. But it would also reduce revenues for both Social Security and Medicare by about $1.6 trillion to $1.8 trillion between fiscal years 2026 and 2035, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates.

Like Biden, Trump has mostly promised not to cut Social Security. Yet in a March CNBC interview, Trump said he would consider cutting “entitlements,” which may refer to Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid.

“There is a lot you can do in terms of entitlements, in terms of cutting and in terms of also the theft and bad management of entitlements,” Trump told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”

Harris opposes benefit cuts

Democratic presidential candidate, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris speaks at a campaign rally at the Georgia State Convocation Center on July 30, 2024 in Atlanta, Georgia. 

Megan Varner | Getty Images

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

IRS’ free tax filing program is at risk amid Trump scrutiny

Published

on

Vithun Khamsong | Moment | Getty Images

The IRS’ free tax filing program is in jeopardy as the agency faces continued cuts from the Trump administration.

After a limited pilot launch in 2024, the program, known as Direct File, expanded to more than 30 million taxpayers across 25 states for the 2025 filing season.   

Funded under the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, the program has been heavily scrutinized by Republicans, who have criticized the cost and participation rate. Over the past year, Republican lawmakers from both chambers have introduced legislation to halt the IRS’ free filing program.

Now, some reports say Direct File could be at risk. Meanwhile, no decision has been made yet about the program’s future, according to a White House administration official. 

More from Personal Finance:
Federal Reserve: College is still worth it for most students
Here’s why retirees shouldn’t fully ditch stocks
Here’s how a trade war could impact the price of clothing

During his Senate confirmation hearing in January, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent committed to keeping Direct File active during the 2025 filing season without commenting on future years.  

“I will consult and study the program and understand it better and make sure it works to serve the IRS’ three goals of collections, customer service and privacy,” Bessent told the Senate Finance Committee at the hearing. 

However, the future of the free tax filing program remains unclear.

As of April 17, the Direct File website said the program would be open until Oct. 15, which is the deadline for taxpayers who filed for a federal tax extension.

Many taxpayers can also file for free via another program known as IRS Free File, which is a public-private partnership between the IRS and the Free File Alliance, a nonprofit coalition of tax software companies.

The IRS in May 2024 extended the Free File program through 2029.

Mixed reviews of IRS Direct File

Direct File supporters on Wednesday blasted the possible decision to end the program.

“No one should have to pay huge fees just to file their taxes,” Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said in a statement on Wednesday.

Wyden described the program as “a massive success, saving taxpayers millions in fees, saving them time and cutting out an unnecessary middleman.”

In January, more than 130 Democrats, led by Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Chris Coons, D-Del., voiced support for Direct File.

73% of Americans are financially stressed

However, opponents have criticized the program’s participation rate and cost.

During the 2024 pilot, some 423,450 taxpayers created or signed in to a Direct File account. Roughly one-third of those taxpayers, about 141,000 filers, submitted a return through Direct File, according to a March report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.

Those figures represent a mid-season 2024 launch in 12 states for only simple returns. It’s unclear how many taxpayers used Direct File through the April 15 deadline.

The cost for Direct File through the pilot was $24.6 million, the IRS reported in May 2024. Direct File operational costs were an extra $2.4 million, according to the agency.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Should investors dump U.S. stocks for international equities? Experts weigh in

Published

on

Investors should use the relief rally to reduce exposure, says Fairlead's Katie Stockton

Some investors accustomed to the dominance of U.S. stocks versus the rest of the world are making a stunning pivot toward international equities, fearing U.S. assets may have taken on more risk amid escalating trade tensions initiated by President Donald Trump.

The S&P 500 sank more than 6% since Trump first announced his tariff plan, while the Dow and Nasdaq have each tumbled more than 7%.

There was a strong argument to dial back U.S. stock holdings and adopt a more global portfolio even before the recent volatility, said Christine Benz, director of personal finance and retirement planning for Morningstar.

“But I think the case for international diversification is even greater 1744909145, given recent developments,” she said.

Jacob Manoukian, head of U.S. investment strategy at J.P. Morgan Private Bank, offered a similar assessment. “Global diversification seems like a prudent strategy,” he wrote in a research note on Monday.

U.S. had the world beat by ‘sizable margin’

Some experts, however, don’t think investors should be so quick to dump U.S. stocks and chase returns abroad.

The United States is still “a quality market that looks like a bargain,” said Paul Christopher, head of global investment strategy at the Wells Fargo Investment Institute.

U.S. stocks had been outperforming the world for years heading into 2025.

We are in an incredible moment for those who want to bet against U.S. stocks, says Jim Cramer

The S&P 500 index had an average annual return of 11.9% from mid-2008 through 2024, beating returns of developed countries by a “sizable margin,” according to analysts at J.P. Morgan Private Bank.

The MSCI EAFE index — which tracks stock returns in developed markets outside of the U.S. and Canada — was up 3.6% per year over the same period, on average, they wrote.

However, the story is different this year, experts say.

“In a surprising twist, the U.S. equity market has just offered investors a timely reminder about why diversification matters,” the analysts at J.P. Morgan Private Bank wrote. “Although U.S. outperformance has been a familiar feature of global equity markets since mid-2008, change is possible.”

More from Personal Finance:
Why retirees shouldn’t fully ditch stocks
Cash may feel safe when stocks slide, but it has risks
How a trade war could impact the price of clothing

The Trump administration’s tariff policy and an escalating trade war with China have raised concerns about the growth of the U.S. economy.

U.S. markets have been under pressure ever since the White House first announced country-specific tariffs on April 2. Trump imposed tariffs on many nations, including a 145% levy on imports from China.

As of Thursday morning, the S&P 500 was down roughly 10% year-to-date, while the Nasdaq Composite has pulled back more than 16% in 2025. The Dow Jones Industrial Average had lost nearly 8%. Alternatively, the EAFE was up about 7%.

Is U.S. exceptionalism dead?

The sharp sell-off in U.S. markets has raised doubts as to whether U.S. assets “are as attractive to foreigners now as they once were and, perhaps as a consequence, whether ‘U.S. [equity] market exceptionalism’ could be on the way out,” market analysts at Capital Economics wrote Thursday.

At the same time, rising global trade tensions have taken a toll on the bond market, threatening to shake the confidence of holders of U.S. debt. The U.S. dollar has also weakened, nearing a one-year low as of Thursday morning.

It’s unusual for U.S. stocks, bonds and the dollar to fall at the same time, analysts said.

Former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said Monday that President Donald Trump’s tariffs have made it more difficult for Americans to find comfort in the U.S. financial system.

“This is really creating an environment in which households and businesses feel paralyzed by the uncertainty about what’s going to happen,” Yellen told CNBC during a “Squawk Box” interview. “It makes planning almost impossible.”

The U.S. fire had ‘already been burning’

A trader works on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange at the opening bell in New York City, on April 17, 2025.

Timothy A. Clary | AFP | Getty Images

That said, international and U.S. stock returns tend to ebb and flow in cycles, with each showing multi-year periods of relative strength and weakness.

Since 1975, U.S. stock returns have outperformed those of international stocks for stretches of about eight years, on average, according to an analysis by Hartford Funds through 2024. Then, U.S. stocks cede the mantle to international stocks, it said.

Based on history, non-U.S. equities are overdue to reclaim the top spot: The U.S. is currently 13.8 years into the current cycle of stock outperformance, according to the Hartford Funds analysis.

Link: When it feels worst, it's often the best time to buy

U.S. markets had already showed weakness heading into the year amid concerns about the health of the economy grew and as “air came out the valuations of ‘big-tech’ stocks,” according to Capital Economics analysts.

“In that respect, ‘Liberation Day’ — which accentuated these moves — only added fuel to a fire that had already been burning,” they wrote.

Advisors: ‘Tread carefully here’

A good starting point for investors would be to mirror a global stock fund like the Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF (VT), said Benz of Morningstar. That fund holds about 63% of assets in U.S. stocks and 37% in non-U.S. stocks.

It may make sense to pare back exposure to international stocks as individual investors approach retirement, she said, to reduce the volatility that comes from fluctuations in foreign exchange rates.

“Part of our core models for clients have always had international exposure, it’s traditionally part of any risk-adjusted portfolio,” said certified financial planner Douglas Boneparth, president of Bone Fide Wealth in New York, of the conversations he is having with his clients.

Financial advisor or business people meeting discussing financial figures. They are discussing finance charts and graphs on a laptop computer. Rear view of sitting in an office and are discussing performance

Courtneyk | E+ | Getty Images

Even though those asset classes didn’t perform as well over the last few years, “they’ve done a pretty good job here of helping reduce the brunt of this tariff volatility,” said Boneparth, a member of the CNBC Financial Advisor Council.

Still, Boneparth cautions investors against making any sudden moves to add non-U.S. equities to their portfolios.

“If you are thinking about making changes now, be careful,” he said. “Do you lock in losses to U.S. stocks to gain international exposure? You want to tread carefully here,” he said. “Are you chasing or timing? You usually don’t want to do those things.”

However, this may be a good time to check your investments to make sure you are still allocated properly and rebalance as needed, he added. “By rebalancing, you can rotate out of less risky assets into equities, strategically buying the dip.”

There have been very few times in history when clients asked about increasing their investments overseas, “which is happening now,” said CFP Barry Glassman, the founder and president of Glassman Wealth Services.

“Given that both stocks and currency are outperforming U.S. indices it’s no wonder there is greater interest in foreign stocks today,” said Glassman, who is also a member of the CNBC Advisor Council.

“Even in the past, when U.S. stocks have fallen, the dollar’s gains helped to offset a portion of the losses. In the past two weeks, that has not been the case,” he said.

Glassman said he maintains a two-thirds to one-third ratio of U.S. stocks to foreign stock funds in the portfolios he manages.

“We are not making any moves now,” he said. “The moves for us were made over time to maintain what we consider the appropriate foreign allocation.”

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Here’s why retirees shouldn’t fully ditch stocks

Published

on

Lordhenrivoton | E+ | Getty Images

Retirees may think moving all their investments to cash and bonds — and out of stocks — protects their nest egg from risk.

They would be wrong, experts say.

Most, if not all, retirees need stocks — the growth engine of an investment portfolio — to ensure they don’t run out of money during a retirement that might last decades, experts said.

“It’s important for retirees to have some equities in their portfolio to increase the long-term returns,” said David Blanchett, head of retirement research for PGIM, an investment management arm of Prudential Financial.

Longevity is biggest financial risk

Longevity risk — the risk of outliving one’s savings — is the biggest financial danger for retirees, Blanchett said.

The average life span has increased from about 68 years in 1950 to to 78.4 in 2023, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. What’s more, the number of 100-year-olds in the U.S. is expected to quadruple over the next three decades, according to Pew Research Center.

Retirees may feel that shifting out of stocks — especially during bouts of volatility like the recent tariff-induced selloff — insulates their portfolio from risk.

Seeking safety amid market volatility: Strategies to keep your money safe

They would be correct in one sense: cash and bonds are generally less volatile than stocks and therefore buffer retirees from short-term gyrations in the stock market.

Indeed, finance experts recommend dialing back stock exposure over time and boosting allocations to bonds and cash. The thinking is that investors don’t want to subject a huge chunk of their portfolio to steep losses if they need to access those funds in the short term.

Dialing back too much from stocks, however, poses a risk, too, experts said.

More from Personal Finance:
Cash may feel safe when stocks slide, but has risks
How a trade war could impact the price of clothing
Is now a good time to buy gold?

Retirees who pare their stock exposure back too much may have a harder time keeping up with inflation and they raise the risk of outliving their savings, Blanchett said.

Stocks have had a historical return of about 10% per year, outperforming bonds by about five percentage points, Blanchett said. Of course, this means that over the long term, investing in stocks has yielded higher returns compared to investing in bonds. 

“Retirement can last up to three decades or more, meaning your portfolio will still need to grow in order to support you,” wrote Judith Ward and Roger Young, certified financial planners at T. Rowe Price, an asset manager.

What’s a good stock allocation for retirees?

So, what’s a good number?

One rule of thumb is for investors to subtract their age from 110 or 120 to determine the percentage of their portfolio they should allocate to stocks, Blanchett said.

For example, a roughly 50/50 allocation to stocks and bonds would be a reasonable starting point for the typical 65-year-old, he said.

An investor in their 60s might hold 45% to 65% of their portfolio in stocks; 30% to 50% in bonds; and 0% to 10% in cash, Ward and Young of T. Rowe Price wrote.

Someone in their 70s and older might have 30% to 50% in stocks; 40% to 60% in bonds; and 0% to 20% in cash, they said.

Why your stock allocation may differ

However, every investor is different, Blanchett said. They have different abilities to take risk, he said.

For example, investors who’ve saved too much money, or can fund their lifestyles with guaranteed income like pensions and Social Security — can choose to take less risk with their investment portfolios because they don’t need the long-term investment growth, Blanchett said.

Target date funds

The less important consideration for investors is risk “appetite,” he said.

This is essentially their stomach for risk. A retiree who knows they’ll panic in a downturn should probably not have more than 50% to 60% in stocks, Blanchett said.

The more comfortable with volatility and the better-funded a retiree is, the more aggressive they can be, Blanchett said.

Other key considerations

Continue Reading

Trending