An IVoteMyVote.com Editorial
By Claude Tatro | Founder, IVoteMyVote.com | October 2026
The Core Challenge: Trust Fund Depletion by 2032
The 2026 Trustees’ Report projects that the retirement and survivor trust fund will exhaust its reserves in late 2032. Without Congressional action, continuing income would only cover approximately 78 percent of scheduled benefits. Informed discussion is urgently needed now while thoughtful, proactive solutions remain viable.
Social Security deserves an informed discussion now, while there is still time to make thoughtful changes.
First, let us clarify the problem. Social Security’s annual costs have exceeded its total income since 2021. Reserves make up the difference.
The 2026 trustees’ report projects that the retirement and survivor trust fund will exhaust its reserves in late 2032. Continuing income would then cover approximately 78 percent of scheduled benefits unless Congress acts. Social Security would still receive revenue, but it could not sustain all promised payments.
What About Beneficiaries Who Have Not Contributed Through Employment?
Social Security provides insurance for families as well as workers. Spouses, surviving spouses, and eligible children can receive benefits based on a worker’s earnings record. Approximately 13 percent of beneficiary entries fall within family and survivor categories. That does not mean these individuals never worked or paid Social Security taxes. The published figures do not establish the percentage with no work credits whatsoever.
Their benefits are connected to an insured worker’s record. They should not be described as payments without a contribution connection. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a separate assistance program.
What Solutions Should We Consider?
When examining potential paths to long-term solvency, several major approaches emerge:
- Adjusting Benefit Growth: One approach is reducing benefits or slowing their future growth. Reducing administrative services, however, is different from reducing benefits and cannot by itself resolve the financing gap.
- Retirement Age Adjustments: Another is gradually raising the age for starting benefits or receiving full retirement benefits. Those are separate choices. Either requires careful consideration of workers in physically demanding occupations and people unable to remain employed.
- Contribution Adjustments: A third approach is increasing contributions from employees, employers, or both. Congress could also consider taxing a larger portion of higher earnings above the current payroll tax cap.
Examining a Dedicated Consumption Tax
A further proposal deserves serious examination: a broad consumption tax dedicated to Social Security, replacing its existing revenue sources rather than simply adding another tax.
Such a change would require careful calculation:
- What purchases would be taxed?
- What rate would support promised benefits?
- How would we protect retirees who already paid payroll taxes and would now pay again when spending their savings?
Refundable credits, rebates, or other offsets would be essential considerations for protecting people with low incomes. Every exemption or offset must be included when calculating the necessary tax rate.
“Tariffs offer a related lesson about who bears a tax. Foreign governments do not write the checks for American tariffs. Importers pay the duties, and much of the burden reaches American businesses and consumers through costs and prices. Foreign sellers may absorb some through lower prices, but tariffs should never be presented as free money paid by another country.”
If a consumption tax could reliably support Social Security while protecting poorer households, that experience might inform proposals for other government functions. Replacing all federal income and payroll taxes would be a much larger undertaking requiring separate analysis.
Demanding Accountability from Candidates
Let us ask candidates for specific proposals, honest costs, and clear protections for those most dependent on their benefits.
