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

Trump, Musk promote idea of $5,000 ‘DOGE dividend’ checks

Published

on

Elon Musk and President Donald Trump in the Oval Office at the White House, Feb. 11, 2025.

Andrew Harnik | Getty Images News | Getty Images

As the so-called Department of Government Efficiency looks to cut federal spending, Elon Musk and President Donald Trump have floated the idea that some of any savings could come back to Americans in the form of $5,000 dividend checks.

But experts say it’s too soon to say whether such checks could materialize — and caution that if they did, there could be economic consequences for consumers.

How ‘DOGE dividend’ proposal came to be

Both Musk and Trump boosted a proposal that James Fishback, CEO of investment firm Azoria, posted Feb. 18 on social media platform X, that suggested sending millions of American households checks.

“Americans sent their hard-earned tax dollars to Washington, D.C.,” Fishback told CNBC.com. He said he believes some of “those tax dollars were wasted.”

“There needs to be restitution to correct that,” Fishback said.

The White House released in early February a list of what it called “waste and abuse” of funds at the U.S. Agency for International Development, including $1.5 million to promote diversity, equity and inclusion in Serbia’s workplaces and $70,000 for a DEI musical in Ireland.

Under Trump, DOGE, an advisory group, set an aim to cut $2 trillion in federal spending. However, Musk said in a recent interview that target may be the “best-case outcome” and there may be a “good shot” of cutting half that amount.

In his proposal, Fishback starts from the presumption that DOGE will achieve $2 trillion in cuts to the government. By taking 20% of that total savings — or around $400 billion — that may leave room for around 79 million tax-paying households to each receive a $5,000 tax refund, per Fishback’s plan.

More from Personal Finance:
How Trump, DOGE job cuts may affect the economy
What experts say borrowers should do amid risks to Education Dept.
Why Trump tariffs may raise your car insurance premiums

The idea of direct money may sound familiar to American households, millions of whom received Covid-era stimulus checks. But these payments would be different from the stimulus checks, which work to stimulate the economy at a time of weak gross domestic product growth, Fishback said. Unlike the stimulus checks, the DOGE dividend checks would be only for households that pay federal income taxes, Fishback said.

The idea calls for a dividend closer to something like the Alaska Permanent Fund, in that it would represent a share of collected savings, noted Maya MacGuineas, president of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

The rebate would be sent only to households that are “net payers of federal income tax,” per the plan — people who pay more in taxes than they get back. Under those terms, lower-income Americans would not qualify for the return. According to the Pew Research Center, most Americans who have an adjusted gross income of under $40,000 effectively pay no federal income tax.

Fishback, meanwhile, told CNBC.com there’s no minimum income requirement, but Americans would have to file a federal tax return to receive the money. The prospect of the payments may provide an incentive for non-working individuals to re-enter the labor force, according to the plan.

To be sure, the terms of the plan could change if lawmakers decide to consider it.

Trump has welcomed the idea. Musk, who Trump brought on board to implement DOGE, “very much agrees the incentives are in place” to get everyday Americans to report waste, fraud and abuse, Fishback said of a recent conversation he had with the billionaire.

Congress would have to approve payments

Yet to send the DOGE checks out, the Trump administration will need Congress’ approval. Fishback has been meeting with House and Senate members to promote the idea.

Last week, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, said that while it would be “great” politically, other priorities should come first. Experts say DOGE needs to figure out how much money has been saved before promising people checks in the mail.

“We have a $36 trillion federal debt. We have a giant deficit,” Johnson said. “I think we need to pay down the credit card.”

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller recently said the DOGE checks will be “worked on through the reconciliation process with Congress that’s going underway right now.”

Yet some experts have expressed doubts about the proposal.

“There’s no appropriation for this,” said Elaine Kamarck, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who ran the Clinton Administration’s National Performance Review, which implemented cuts in an effort to modernize and improve the federal government’s performance.

Florida CFO Jimmy Patronis on 'DOGE dividend' proposal: That's Trump being Trump

“You cannot spend money without Congress telling you that you can spend money,” Kamarck said. “That is illegal.”

It also remains to be seen whether the DOGE initiative can generate enough savings to justify $5,000 payments, Kamarck said. Even with the savings DOGE plans hope to generate, initiatives like curbing immigration will require new or increased spending in other areas.

Without yet having generated meaningful savings, it’s premature to talk about dividend checks, MacGuineas said.

“The bottom line is when you’re running $2 trillion deficits every year, you can’t give away more money in stimulus checks,” MacGuineas said.

“Basically, you’re borrowing more to give back to people, but the borrowing still falls on them,” MacGuineas said.

But if the DOGE were able to generate $1 trillion in savings per year, “absolutely additional savings being returned to taxpayers would make total sense and be desirable,” she said.

‘Wrong time’ to have consumer stimulus?

Inflation spiked in the aftermath of the Covid pandemic and is still higher than the Federal Reserve’s 2% target. Some experts worry that additional direct payments to Americans would contribute to more inflation.

“This is certainly the wrong time to have any sort of consumer stimulus,” said Judge Glock, director of research and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. “Inflation remains elevated; any sort of stimulus would exacerbate that inflation.”

However, the amount of money saved under DOGE may not provide payments big enough to fuel inflation, Kamarck said.

The prospect of direct payments comes as Congress may look at extending provisions in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act later this year.

There are already a number of policies being added to that package that are raising deficit concerns, said Alex Muresianu, senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation.

“This would be another very large thing to try and squeeze in as well,” he said.

Meanwhile, Fishback maintains the DOGE dividend checks would simply refund Americans money they already contributed through income taxes.

Moreover, the way Americans would likely use an unexpected $5,000 — by paying off debt, saving or investing toward long-term goals like retirement — would not be inflationary, Fishback said, citing a 2019 CNBC survey.

“Every American has the mechanism with DOGE and the incentive with the DOGE dividend to report this waste, fraud and abuse,” Fishback said. “We’ll save even more of our hard-earned tax dollars when we give every American skin in the game.”

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

1 in 5 Americans are ‘doom spending’ — here’s how that can backfire

Published

on

A customer shops at a Costco store in San Francisco.

Justin Sullivan | Getty Images

With sweeping U.S. tariffs going into effect, more Americans are concerned about the cost of goods and the possibility that prices will rise further in the months ahead.

Those fears are causing some consumers to spend even more than they would otherwise.

To that point , 19% of adults indicate they are “doom spending,” or making impulsive purchases driven by fear and anxiety about the future, according to a recent report by CreditCards.com

More from Personal Finance:
How IRS layoffs could impact your tax filing, refund
As tariffs ramp up, here’s an investment option
DOGE’s FDIC firings put banking system at risk

President Donald Trump said earlier Thursday that his proposed 25% tariffs on products from Canada and Mexico will start March 4.

“It’s too soon to say precisely how the new tariffs imposed by President Trump are affecting consumer spending,” says John Egan, a personal finance expert contributor at CreditCards.com. “However, they very well could cause some consumers to rethink their buying habits, especially when it comes to major purchases.”

Fear of tariffs is driving more buying

To that end, 28% of Americans have already made a large purchase, such as a home appliance or home improvement supplies. Another 22% have also started stockpiling certain items, including non-perishable food, toilet paper and over-the-counter medications, according to CreditCards.com.

But these habits are also pushing 34% of credit card borrowers to take on more debt this year, the report also found. CreditCards.com polled 2,000 adults in February.

The downside of doom spending

“One of the drawbacks of doom spending is that it could prompt you to overspend and strain your budget,” Egan said. “In addition, doom spending might lead you to pile up credit card debt, which could put you in a financial hole due to interest charges and fees.”

Why spaving is bad for your wallet

As credit card debt tops $1.21 trillion, it’s more important to focus on paying down card debt rather than spending even more, experts say.

“Anyone who tells you they know what the next few months hold for the economy is just speculating,” said Matt Schulz, chief credit analyst at LendingTree and the author of “Ask Questions, Save Money, Make More.”

“It’s easy to feel powerless with so much uncertainty out there, but there are plenty of things you can do to take more control of your financial situation,” Schulz said.

“Two of the best things you can do are knocking down your high-interest debt and building your emergency fund, to the degree that you can,” he said. “Both are easier said than done, for sure, but both will put you in a better position to handle whatever situations come your way.”

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

Continue Reading

Personal Finance

Trump plan to freeze funding stymies Biden-era energy rebates for consumers

Published

on

Westend61 | Westend61 | Getty Images

Some states have stopped disbursing funds to consumers via Biden-era rebate programs tied to home energy efficiency, due to a Trump administration freeze on federal funding enacted in January.

The Inflation Reduction Act, passed in 2022, had earmarked $8.8 billion of federal funds for consumers through two home energy rebate programs, to be administered by states, territories and the District of Columbia.

Arizona, Colorado, Georgia and Rhode Island — which are in various phases of rollout — have paused or delayed their fledgling programs, citing Trump administration policy.

The White House on Jan. 27 put a freeze on the disbursement of federal funds that conflict with President Trump’s agenda — including initiatives related to green energy and climate change — as a reason for halting the disbursement of rebate funds to consumers.

That fate of that freeze is still up in the air. A federal judge issued an order Tuesday that continued to block the policy, for example. However, it appears agencies had been withholding funding in some cases in defiance of earlier court rulings, according to ProPublica reporting.

In any event, the freeze — or the threat of it — appears to be impacting state rebate programs.

“Coloradans who would receive the Home Energy Rebate savings are still locked out by the Trump administration in the dead of winter,” Ari Rosenblum, a spokesperson for the Colorado Energy Office, said in an e-mailed statement.

The U.S. Department of Energy and the White House didn’t return a request for comment from CNBC on the funding freeze.

In some states, rebates are ‘currently unavailable’

Consumers are eligible for up to $8,000 of Home Efficiency Rebates and up to $14,000 of Home Electrification and Appliance Rebates, per federal law.

The rebates defray the cost of retrofitting homes and upgrading appliances to be more energy efficient. Such tweaks aim to cut consumers’ utility bills while also reducing planet-warming carbon emissions.

California, the District of Columbia, Maine, Michigan, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina and Wisconsin had also launched phases of their rebate programs in recent months, according to data on an archived federal website.

All states and territories (except for South Dakota) had applied for the federal rebate funding and the U.S. Department of Energy had approved funding for each of them.

More from Personal Finance:
Gold is hot — but a classic Warren Buffett rule suggests caution
What upcoming budget negotiations may mean for Social Security
How Trump, DOGE job cuts may affect the economy

The Arizona Governor’s Office of Resiliency said its Home Energy Rebates programs would be paused until federal funds are freed up.

“Due to the current federal Executive Orders, memorandums from the White House Office of Management and Budget, and communications from the U.S. Department of Energy, funding for all Efficiency Arizona programs is currently unavailable,” it said in an announcement Friday.

Rhode Island paused new applications as of Jan. 27 due to “current uncertainty” with Inflation Reduction Act funding and executive orders, according to its Office of Energy Resources.

How Berkshire's insurers deal with climate change risk

The Georgia Environmental Finance Authority launched a pilot program for the rebates in fall 2024. That program is ongoing, a spokesperson confirmed Monday.

However, the timeline for a full program launch initially planned for 2025 “is delayed until we receive more information from the U.S. Department of Energy,” the Georgia spokesperson explained in an e-mail.

However, not all states have pressed the pause button: It appears Maine is still moving forward, for example.

“The program remains open to those who are eligible,” Afton Vigue, a spokesperson for the Maine Governor’s Energy Office, said in an e-mail.

The status of rebates in the eight other states and districts to have launched their programs is unclear. Their respective energy departments or governor’s offices didn’t return requests for comment.

‘Signs of an interest’

While the Trump administration on Jan. 29 rescinded its memo ordering a freeze on federal grants and loans — two days after its initial release — the White House said the freeze nonetheless remained in full force.

Democratic attorneys general in 22 states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming the freeze is unlawful. The White House has claimed it is necessary to ensure spending aligns with Trump’s presidential agenda.

David Terry, president of the National Association of State Energy Officials, said he is optimistic the rebate funding will be released to states soon.

“For these two particular programs, I do not think [the freeze] will stymie the programs,” Terry said. “I see signs of an interest in moving them forward and working with the states to implement them.”

Continue Reading

Trending