Connect with us

Personal Finance

How 2024 presidential race may influence Social Security

Published

on

Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris are shown on screen during a debate watch party at the Cameo Art House Theatre in Fayetteville, North Carolina, Sept. 10, 2024.

Allison Joyce | Bloomberg | Getty Images

With the Social Security Administration facing a looming funding crisis over the next decade, it’s clear that the next U.S. president — either Democratic candidate Kamala Harris or Republican candidate Donald Trump — is poised to inherit a Social Security dilemma.

Almost 68 million Americans receive Social Security payments every month. The benefits support seniors in their retirement, disabled Americans and survivors of beneficiaries, but the future of the Social Security Administration has been in jeopardy for years.

More than 11,200 Americans are now turning 65 every day. As more retirees start to claim Social Security, there are not enough workers contributing to the program to make up for that increase in benefit payments.

When such a shortfall happens, Social Security turns to its trust funds — money that is set aside to help pay for benefits and other administrative costs.

But the trust fund Social Security relies on to pay retirement benefits is projected to be depleted in 2033. At that time, just 79% of benefits may be payable, according to the program’s trustees.

The average retired worker would see about a $403 cut to their current average monthly benefit of $1,920.

Most Americans rank Social Security as “one of the top” or a “very important” issue that will help determine how they vote in November, a recent CNBC poll found.

Social Security is a key issue for voters, survey finds: Here’s how to maximize benefits

Both presidential candidates — former president Trump and Vice President Harris — have vowed to protect Social Security benefits.

But restoring the program’s solvency will require changes — benefit cuts, tax increases or a combination of both. Yet some experts say the candidates’ discussions have thus far avoided specific details on how to address that shortfall.

“We’re not seeing anyone step up and say, ‘In nine years, our main retirement program is looking at the trust of being insolvent, and that could lead to roughly a 20% benefit cut across the board of everybody,” said Jason Fichtner, chief economist at the Bipartisan Policy Center and executive director of the Alliance for Lifetime Income’s Retirement Income Institute.

Trump promises no taxes on Social Security benefits

Republican presidential nominee and former U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a rally in Coachella, California, U.S., October 12, 2024. 

Mike Blake | Reuters

On the campaign trail, Trump has touted an idea aimed at letting retirees keep more of their Social Security checks — ending taxes on benefits.

“Seniors should not pay tax on Social Security,” Trump wrote on July 31 in all capital letters on social media platform Truth Social.

A recent ABC News/Ipsos poll found 85% of voters support the idea.

Currently, retirees pay federal income taxes on up to 85% of their benefits, depending on their incomes.

Just how much taxes retirees pay on benefits is based on a formula called combined income, the sum of adjusted gross income, nontaxable interest and half of Social Security benefits.

Married couples may pay taxes on up to 50% of their benefits if their combined incomes are between $32,000 and $44,000. If their incomes are over $44,000, up to 85% of their benefits may be taxable.

Individuals may be liable for taxes on up to 50% of their benefits if their incomes are between $25,000 and $34,000. If they have more than $34,000 in income, up to 85% of their benefits are taxable.

Because those thresholds do not change from year to year, more beneficiaries are paying taxes on their benefit income over time.

Ending taxes on Social Security benefits would move the insolvency date of Social Security’s trust fund closer by over one year, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

More from Personal Finance:
Social Security Administration announces 2.5% COLA for 2025
House may force vote on bill affecting pensioners’ Social Security benefits
72% of Americans worry Social Security will run out in their lifetime

And it may not make a big difference in retirees’ budgets, according to Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center.

The median household income for retirees is about $50,000, so the “vast majority” pay very little or nothing in taxes on their Social Security benefits, Gleckman said.

Exempting taxes on benefits would mostly help those with incomes between $63,000 and $200,000, the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center’s research found.

But while the top 20% of households would see an average tax cut of about $1,400 after the elimination of the taxes on Social Security benefits, Gleckman explained, they would see an average tax increase of $6,500 with Trump’s plans to impose tariffs on imports.

“The net effect of what Trump is trying to do, if you look at everything including the tariffs, is probably increased taxes on retirees, even if they do get some benefit from repealing the tax on Social Security benefits,” Gleckman said.

The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment by press time.

Harris wants ‘wealthiest Americans’ to ‘pay their fair share’

Democratic presidential nominee U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris looks on as she participates a “town hall” with radio host Charlamagne Tha God, in Detroit, Michigan, U.S., October 15, 2024.

Kevin Lamarque | Reuters

The Harris campaign’s economic plan promises to “shore up Social Security and Medicare so that these essential programs will stay solvent in the long run by making corporations and the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share in taxes.”

In budget proposals and during the State of the Union, President Joe Biden has likewise called for having high earners pay more into the program.

More specific details on how Democratic candidate Harris would restore solvency to the program as president were not available by press time.

Employers and employees each pay 6.2% of wages to Social Security up to a taxable maximum (self-employed individuals pay 12.4%). In 2024, the limit on earnings that are subject to the Social Security payroll tax is $168,600. Top earners with $1 million in gross annual wage income stopped paying into the program as of March 2, according to the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

Washington Democrats have proposed reapplying those taxes for earnings over $400,000 or $250,000 in separate proposals, while also potentially raising taxes on investment income. Those tax increases would improve the program’s solvency, while also making certain benefit increases possible, per the proposals.

If Harris holds to the $400,000 threshold set by the Biden administration, her Social Security proposal would have “no impact on the vast majority of households,” according to Gleckman, since around 95% to 98% of households make that amount or less.  

“Vice President Harris and Governor Walz are fighting to lower costs and will always protect and strengthen Social Security and Medicare,” campaign spokeswoman Mia Ehrenberg said in a statement.

Older Americans may feel effects of reform

As Social Security’s depletion dates get closer, any reform changes would need to phase in more quickly.

And people ages 55 and over — who are typically left out of Social Security reform proposals such as raising the retirement age — may also feel the effects of any changes, according to Fichtner.

“You don’t have a lot of time to change your retirement trajectory once you hit 55,” Fichtner said. “But now that we’re getting so close to trust fund depletion … and the magnitude is so large, I’m not sure we can actually afford from a financial standpoint to hold them harmless.”

Regardless of who is elected, it remains to be seen how much a new president can accomplish on Social Security.

With 60 votes required in the Senate to pass Social Security reform, both parties would have to agree.

Experts say it is possible lawmakers may wait until the last minute to address the issue.

“As you get closer and closer to the insolvency date, it means the benefit reductions have to be steeper and quicker, and it means the tax increases have to be more significant and faster,” Gleckman said. “So it makes it even harder.”

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Trump administration loses appeal of DOGE Social Security restraining order

Published

on

A person holds a sign during a protest against cuts made by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration to the Social Security Administration, in White Plains, New York, U.S., March 22, 2025. 

Nathan Layne | Reuters

The Trump administration’s appeal of a temporary restraining order blocking the so-called Department of Government Efficiency from accessing sensitive personal Social Security Administration data has been dismissed.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit on Tuesday dismissed the government’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The case will proceed in the district court. A motion for a preliminary injunction will be filed later this week, according to national legal organization Democracy Forward.

The temporary restraining order was issued on March 20 by federal Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander and blocks DOGE and related agents and employees from accessing agency systems that contain personally identifiable information.

More from Personal Finance:
Judge slams Social Security chief for agency shutdown ‘threats’
Social Security changes may impact service, benefit payments
Trump pick to lead Social Security faces questions on DOGE

That includes information such as Social Security numbers, medical provider information and treatment records, employer and employee payment records, employee earnings, addresses, bank records, and tax information.

DOGE team members were also ordered to delete all nonanonymized personally identifiable information in their possession.

The plaintiffs include unions and retiree advocacy groups, namely the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the Alliance for Retired Americans and the American Federation of Teachers. 

“We are pleased the 4th Circuit agreed to let this important case continue in district court,” Richard Fiesta, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans, said in a written statement. “Every American retiree must be able to trust that the Social Security Administration will protect their most sensitive and personal data from unwarranted disclosure.”

The Trump administration’s appeal ignored standard legal procedure, according to Democracy Forward. The administration’s efforts to halt the enforcement of the temporary restraining order have also been denied.

“The president will continue to seek all legal remedies available to ensure the will of the American people is executed,” Liz Huston, a White House spokesperson, said via email.

Fiserv CEO on the nomination to Social Security Commisioner role

The Social Security Administration did not respond to a request from CNBC for comment.

Immediately after the March 20 temporary restraining order was put in place, Social Security Administration Acting Commissioner Lee Dudek said in press interviews that he may have to shut down the agency since it “applies to almost all SSA employees.”

Dudek was admonished by Hollander, who called that assertion “inaccurate” and said the court order “expressly applies only to SSA employees working on the DOGE agenda.”

Dudek then said that the “clarifying guidance” issued by the court meant he would not shut down the agency. “SSA employees and their work will continue under the [temporary restraining order],” Dudek said in a March 21 statement.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Most credit card users carry debt, pay over 20% interest: Fed report

Published

on

Julpo | E+ | Getty Images

Many Americans are paying a hefty price for their credit card debt.

As a primary source of unsecured borrowing, 60% of credit cardholders carry debt from month to month, according to a new report by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

At the same time, credit card interest rates are “very high,” averaging 23% annually in 2023, the New York Fed found, also making credit cards one of the most expensive ways to borrow money.

“With the vast majority of the American public using credit cards for their purchases, the interest rate that is attached to these products is significant,” said Erica Sandberg, consumer finance expert at CardRates.com. “The more a debt costs, the more stress this puts on an already tight budget.”

More from Personal Finance:
How to spring-clean your finances
Americans are suffering from ‘sticker shock’ — how to adjust
1 in 5 Americans are ‘doom spending’ — how that can backfire

Most credit cards have a variable rate, which means there’s a direct connection to the Federal Reserve’s benchmark. And yet, credit card lenders set annual percentage rates well above the central bank’s key borrowing rate, currently targeted in a range between 4.25% to 4.5%, where it has been since December.

Following the Federal Reserve’s rate hike in 2022 and 2023, the average credit card rate rose from 16.34% to more than 20% today — a significant increase fueled by the Fed’s actions to combat inflation.

“Card issuers have determined what the market will bear and are comfortable within this range of interest rates,” said Matt Schulz, chief credit analyst at LendingTree.

APRs will come down as the central bank reduces rates, but they will still only ease off extremely high levels. With just a few potential quarter-point cuts on deck, APRs aren’t likely to fall much, according to Schulz.

Credit card debt?

Despite the steep cost, consumers often turn to credit cards, in part because they are more accessible than other types of loans, Schulz said. 

In fact, credit cards are the No. 1 source of unsecured borrowing and Americans’ credit card tab continues to creep higher. In the last year, credit card debt rose to a record $1.21 trillion.

Because credit card lending is unsecured, it is also banks’ riskiest type of lending.

“Lenders adjust interest rates for two primary reasons: cost and risk,” CardRates’ Sandberg said.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s research shows that credit card charge-offs averaged 3.96% of total balances between 2010 and 2023. That compares to only 0.46% and 0.43% for business loans and residential mortgages, respectively.

As a result, roughly 53% of banks’ annual default losses were due to credit card lending, according to the NY Fed research.

“When you offer a product to everyone you are assuming an awful lot of risk,” Schulz said.

Further, “when times get tough they get tough for most everybody,” he added. “That makes it much more challenging for card issuers.”

The best way to pay off debt

The best move for those struggling to pay down revolving credit card debt is to consolidate with a 0% balance transfer card, experts suggest.

“There is enormous competition in the credit card market,” Sandberg said. Because lenders are constantly trying to capture new cardholders, those 0% balance transfer credit card offers are still widely available.

Cards offering 12, 15 or even 24 months with no interest on transferred balances “are basically the best tool in your toolbelt when it comes to knocking down credit card debt,” Schulz said. “Not accruing interest for two years on a balance is pretty hard to argue with.”

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

The 60/40 portfolio may no longer represent ‘true diversification’: Fink

Published

on

Andrew Ross Sorkin speaks with BlackRock CEO Larry Fink during the New York Times DealBook Summit in the Appel Room at the Jazz at Lincoln Center in New York City on Nov. 30, 2022.

Michael M. Santiago | Getty Images

It may be time to rethink the traditional 60/40 investment portfolio, according to BlackRock CEO Larry Fink.

In a new letter to investors, Fink writes the traditional allocation comprised of 60% stocks and 40% bonds that dates back to the 1950s “may no longer fully represent true diversification.”

“The future standard portfolio may look more like 50/30/20 — stocks, bonds and private assets like real estate, infrastructure and private credit.” Fink writes.

Most professional investors love to talk their book, and Fink is no exception. BlackRock has pursued several recent acquisitions — Global Infrastructure Partners, Preqin and HPS Investment Partners — with the goal of helping to increase investors’ access to private markets.

More from Personal Finance:
Why uncertainty makes the stock market go haywire
Investors are ‘miles ahead’ if they avoid 3 things, CIO says
How investors can ready their portfolios for a recession

The effort to make it easier to incorporate both public and private investments in a portfolio is analogous to index versus active investments in 2009, Fink said.

Those investment strategies that were then considered separately can now be blended easily at a low cost.

Fink hopes the same will eventually be said for public and private markets.

Yet shopping for private investments now can feel “a bit like buying a house in an unfamiliar neighborhood before Zillow existed, where finding accurate prices was difficult or impossible,” Fink writes.

60/40 portfolio still a ‘great starting point’

After both stocks and bonds saw declines in 2022, some analysts declared the 60/40 portfolio strategy dead. In 2024, however, such a balanced portfolio would have provided a return of about 14%.

“If you want to keep things very simple, the 60/40 portfolio or a target date fund is a great starting point,” said Amy Arnott, portfolio strategist at Morningstar.

If you’re willing to add more complexity, you could consider smaller positions in other asset classes like commodities, private equity or private debt, she said.

However, a 20% allocation in private assets is on the aggressive side, Arnott said.

The total value of private assets globally is about $14.3 trillion, while the public markets are worth about $247 trillion, she said.

For investors who want to keep their asset allocations in line with the market value of various asset classes, that would imply a weighting of about 6% instead of 20%, Arnott said.

Yet a 50/30/20 portfolio is a lot closer to how institutional investors have been allocating their portfolios for years, said Michael Rosen, chief investment officer at Angeles Investments.

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink: Infrastructure will be the largest growing sector in private capital

The 60/40 portfolio, which Rosen previously said reached its “expiration date,” hasn’t been used by his firm’s endowment and foundation clients for decades.

There’s a key reason why. Institutional investors need to guarantee a specific return, also while paying for expenses and beating inflation, Rosen said.

While a 50/30/20 allocation may help deliver “truly outsized returns” to the mass retail market, there’s also a “lot of baggage” that comes with that strategy, Rosen said.

There’s a lack of liquidity, which means those holdings aren’t as easily converted to cash, Rosen said.

What’s more, there’s generally a lack of transparency and significantly higher fees, he said.

Prospective investors should be prepared to commit for 10 years to private investments, Arnott said.

And they also need to be aware that measurement issues with asset classes like private equity means past performance data may not be as reliable, she said.

For the average person, the most likely path toward tapping into private equity will be part of a 401(k) plan, Arnott said. So far, not a lot of companies have added private equity to their 401(k) offerings, but that could change, she said.

“We will probably see more plan sponsors adding private equity options to their lineups going forward,” Arnott said.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Continue Reading

Trending