Social Security: What Would Happen If the Trust Funds Ran Out?

Introduction

Each year when the Social Security trustees release their annual report, attention is focused on the projection of the year that the Social Security trust funds will become insolvent. In their 2014 report, the Trustees projected that, under their intermediate assumptions and under current law, the Disability Insurance (DI) trust fund will become exhausted in 2016 and the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) trust fund will do so in 2034.¹ Although the two funds are legally separate, they are often described in combination. The trustees project that the combined Social Security trust funds will become exhausted in 2033.

Some Americans may believe that if the trust funds were exhausted, Social Security would be unable to pay any benefits. In fact, in 2033, the first year of projected insolvency of the combined Social Security trust funds, the program is projected to have enough tax revenue to pay about 77% of scheduled benefits; that percentage would decline to 72% by the end of the 75-year projection period.

Although benefits would be paid in some form, it is unclear how the necessary reductions would be implemented, because the Social Security Act does not specify what would happen to benefits if a trust fund became exhausted. One option would be to pay full benefit checks on a delayed schedule; another would be to make timely but reduced payments.

This report explains what the Social Security trust funds are and how they work. It describes the historical operations of the trust funds and the Social Security trustees' projections of future operations. It explains what could happen if Congress allowed the trust funds to run out. It also analyzes two scenarios that assume Congress waits until the moment of insolvency to act, showing the magnitude of benefit cuts or tax increases needed and how such changes would affect beneficiaries.

Social Security provides retirement, disability, and survivor benefits to qualifying workers and their families. These benefits are funded from two trust funds: the OASI trust fund and the DI trust fund. The two funds operate separately but are closely linked. Several times in the past—most recently in 1994—Congress has reallocated the Social Security payroll tax rate to equalize the financial conditions of the two trust funds. In part because of those experiences, analysts often treat the two funds collectively.

The trust funds' primary source of income is the Social Security payroll tax, but they also receive income from income taxes on benefits and interest on the funds' balance. The payroll tax consists of a 12.4% tax on wages and self-employment earnings up to the taxable maximum, which is $117,000 in 2014 and increases annually with average wages in the economy. Of the 12.4% total, 10.6% is credited to the OASI trust fund and 1.8% to the DI trust fund.² Some Social Security benefits paid to people with incomes above a certain threshold are subject to income tax. Most of the resulting revenue is credited to the Social Security trust funds, and some goes to the Medicare Health Insurance trust fund.³ In 2013, payroll taxes accounted for 84.9% of Social Security income, interest accounted for 12.0%, and income taxes on benefits accounted for 2.5%.⁴

In 2013, 98.7% of the trust funds' expenditures paid for benefits. Administrative expenses accounted for 0.7% of expenditures. The remaining 0.5% was transferred to the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) as part of a financial interchange with the RRB.⁵ This annual exchange of funds places the Social Security trust funds in the same financial position in which they would have been if railroad service had been covered by Social Security.

In years when Social Security's total receipts, including interest, exceed expenditures, then the trust funds have a surplus. By law, that surplus is invested in special issue Treasury bonds.⁶ In other words, Social Security's cash surpluses are borrowed by the general fund of the U.S. Treasury. The Treasury, in turn, incurs an obligation to repay the bonds with interest.

When the trust funds spend more than they receive in taxes and interest, they have a deficit, which requires Social Security to redeem bonds accumulated in previous years. Treasury pays benefits with cash from general revenues and writes down an equivalent amount of the trust fund's bond holdings.

An alternative measure of the trust funds' finances is given by the cash-flow balance. That measure does not consider interest income, so the trust funds run a cash-flow surplus when tax income exceeds expenditures, and they run a cash-flow deficit when they spend more than they receive in taxes.

If the trust funds are not able to pay all of current expenses out of current tax income and accumulated trust fund assets, they are insolvent. Insolvency means that Social Security's trust funds are unable to pay full benefits on time. It does not mean that Social Security will be completely broke and unable to pay any benefits.⁷

The OASI trust fund was established in 1937; the DI trust fund was established in 1957. Neither of the Social Security trust funds has ever become insolvent. In 2013, the OASI trust fund had a surplus of $64.3 billion, and the DI trust fund had a deficit of $32.2 billion, for a combined surplus of $32.1 billion, including interest. Interest income for the combined funds was $102.8 billion, so on a cash-flow basis, there was a combined 2013 deficit of $70.7 billion. At the end of 2013, the combined trust funds had total assets of $2.8 trillion.⁸

The trust funds have run annual surpluses in most years. Except for the first decades of the program and a few years beginning in the late 1960s, these annual surpluses were typically small relative to the size of the trust funds' expenditures. Beginning in 1975, the combined trust funds ran annual deficits.⁹ The trust funds made up the difference between income and outgo during these years by redeeming some of the bonds accumulated in earlier years. In other words, in those years, the Social Security trust funds received net transfers from the Treasury's general fund.

The Social Security trust funds have never been exhausted. However, in the early 1980s, a solvency crisis loomed for the OASI trust fund. The 1982 Social Security Trustees Report projected that in the absence of legislative changes the OASI trust fund would become insolvent by July 1983.¹⁰ To relieve the pressure on the OASI trust fund temporarily, Congress permitted the fund to borrow from the DI and Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI) trust funds.¹¹ Money was transferred to the OASI fund in 1982 and repaid by 1986.¹² Interfund borrowing authority expired at the end of 1989.¹³

This temporary measure allowed policy makers time to develop a more sustainable solution to Social Security's solvency problem. The Social Security Amendments of 1983 (P.L. 98-21) increased Social Security income and reduced spending. As a result, the combined trust funds ran significant surpluses, which on average exceeded a quarter of outlays from 1987 to 2009.

The aging of the baby-boom population and the recent recession and subsequent weak economy have resulted in higher outlays and lower tax revenues for Social Security. Since 2010, the combined trust funds have run cash-flow deficits, which are projected to continue indefinitely under current law. However, because interest income has exceeded the cash-flow deficit, trust funds have continued to run surpluses, which averaged 7% of outlays from 2010 through 2013.

Cash-flow deficits do not affect Social Security directly. However, if the non-Social Security portion of the federal budget is in deficit, redemption of trust fund bonds puts additional pressure on the overall federal budget.

This CRS report focuses on the trustees' "intermediate" Social Security projections, which reflect their "best estimates" of future demographic and economic trends. Under that set of assumptions, the DI trust fund is exhausted in 2016 and the OASI trust fund is exhausted in 2034.¹⁴ Considered on a combined basis, the trust funds would become insolvent in 2033. However, the trustees' projections—like all long-term projections—are uncertain. They estimate that there is a 10% chance that the combined trust funds would become insolvent in 2029 or earlier and a 10% chance that insolvency would occur in 2038 or later.¹⁵ Using somewhat different assumptions and projection methods, the Congressional Budget Office projects that the combined trust funds will become insolvent in 2030.¹⁶

Even after insolvency, the trust funds will continue to receive income from payroll taxes and income taxes on benefits that will allow some benefits to be paid. The trustees project that, under their intermediate assumptions, tax income will be sufficient to cover about 77% of scheduled benefits following trust fund insolvency in 2033, declining to 72% in 2088.

To put the trust fund balance in context, analysts commonly consider the trust fund ratio: the balance in the trust funds at the beginning of a year divided by projected outlays for that year. The trust fund ratio thus represents the proportion of a year's cost that could be paid solely with the reserves at the beginning of the year. The ratio for the combined trust funds peaked at 358% at the end of 2008. They declined to 332% at the end of 2013 and are continuing to fall. By definition, the ratio will reach zero when the trust funds become exhausted.

Note: The trust fund ratio equals the fund balance at the beginning of a year expressed as a percentage of the cost during the year.

The Social Security Act specifies that benefit payments shall be made only from the trust funds (i.e., accumulated trust fund assets).¹⁷ Another law, the Antideficiency Act, prohibits government spending in excess of available funds.¹⁸ Consequently, if the Social Security trust funds become insolvent—that is, if current tax income and accumulated assets are not sufficient to pay the benefits to which people are entitled—the law effectively prohibits full Social Security benefits from being paid on time.

Benefits Paid On

Birth Date of Worker on Whose Record Benefits are Paid

Third of every month

Any birth date for:

(1) Social Security beneficiaries who also receive SSI benefits or who reside in a foreign country, and

Second Wednesday

1^st to 10^th day of the month

Third Wednesday

11^th to 20^th day of the month

Fourth Wednesday

21^st to 31^st day of the month

To extend the solvency of the DI trust fund, Congress could consider a variety of legislative changes to increase program revenues and reduce program costs. For example, the DI trust fund could be authorized to borrow from the OASI fund, or part of the Social Security payroll tax currently allocated to the OASI fund could be reallocated to the DI trust fund. Such action would hasten the insolvency of the OASI trust fund, however. For additional information, see CRS Report R43318, Social Security Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund: Background and Solvency Issues, by [author name scrubbed].

The next section presents two policy options that could be implemented after the trust funds' combined balance fell to zero to ensure a balanced system in later years:

• the benefit cut scenario, under which benefits would be cut across the board and
• the tax increase scenario, under which the payroll tax rate would increase.

Both scenarios assume that current law would remain in place until the combined trust funds became insolvent. If changes were made sooner, they could be smaller, since the burden of lower benefits or higher taxes would be shared by more beneficiaries or workers over a longer period.²⁴ Either scenario would essentially convert Social Security to a pure pay-as-you-go system, in which income and outgo are equal on an annual basis and there are no trust fund assets. These scenarios are only two of a wide range of possibilities.

Source: CRS, based on 2014 Social Security Trustees Report and Social Security Administration memorandum by Chris Chaplain and Daniel Nickerson, "Present-Law OASDI Payable Percentages: Present-Law Revenue as a Percent of the Cost of Providing Scheduled Benefits through Year 2087," July 2, 2013 (hereinafter cited as SSA Payable Benefits Memo).

One way to understand how such a reduction would affect beneficiaries is to examine the effect on projected replacement rates and real benefit amounts for hypothetical workers.

Replacement Rates

One way of measuring the adequacy of Social Security benefits is the replacement rate, the ratio of a person's benefit to pre-retirement earnings. Replacement rates can be calculated in different ways. This report uses the methodology used by SSA's actuaries, which is to calculate a worker's initial Social Security benefit as a percentage of the worker's average indexed monthly earnings.²⁵ Social Security was established to replace income lost to a family as a result of the retirement, death, or disability of a worker. To ensure that average benefit levels grow along with average wages—thus keeping replacement rates generally steady—initial Social Security benefits are indexed to wage growth. Historically, wages have generally risen faster than prices, allowing the standard of living to rise from one generation to the next.

Between 2014 and 2025, replacement rates for people aged 65 are projected to decrease by about 10% because of the scheduled increase in the full retirement age (FRA). Thereafter, the FRA would remain 67, and scheduled replacement rates would remain steady. But when the trust funds become exhausted, payable benefits and replacement rates would fall immediately by 23%.

Because lower earners have higher replacement rates, the 23% reduction would result in a larger percentage point reduction in replacement rates for low earners than for high earners. The replacement rate for low earners would fall from 49% in 2032 to 37% in 2033, a decline of 12 percentage points. In contrast, the replacement rate for high earners would fall from 30% in 2032 to 23% in 2033, a 7 percentage point drop.

Source: CRS, based on Social Security Administration, Office of the Chief Actuary, Replacement Rates For Hypothetical Retired Workers, Actuarial Note 2014.9, July 2014, and SSA Payable Benefits Memo.

Notes: Replacement rates are for hypothetical earners who claim retirement benefits at the age of 65.

Real Benefit Levels

Another measure of benefit adequacy is initial annual benefit amounts. Since benefits are based on workers' lifetime earnings, higher earners tend to receive higher benefit amounts than lower earners. In 2014, a hypothetical low earner is estimated to receive an annual Social Security benefit of $11,077, a medium earner a benefit of $18,251, and a high earner a benefit of $24,198 in 2014.²⁸

Under the benefit cut scenario, real payable benefit levels are projected to drop by 23% after the trust funds become insolvent in 2033, then to once again rise gradually.²⁹ Under the trustees' projections, benefits in 2034 would be 8% lower than they are today, but by 2042 they would again exceed today's levels and would continue to increase thereafter.

Note: Benefits are for hypothetical earners who claim retirement benefits at the age of 65. After insolvency, scheduled benefits would continue to increase because average real earnings are projected to continue to grow. Payable benefits would therefore also grow over time following the drop upon insolvency, though they would be permanently lower than scheduled benefits. For clarity, scheduled benefits are shown only for high earners.

Upon trust fund exhaustion, the system could also be balanced by raising the payroll tax rate so that the tax income would be sufficient to pay scheduled benefits each year.

Source: CRS based on the 2014 Social Security Trustees Report.

Note: Under the trustees' projections, the current 12.4% payroll tax is sufficient to pay scheduled benefits prior to 2033.

Raising the payroll tax rate would increase most workers' taxes by the same proportion. However, because covered wages are taxable only up to a specified maximum ($117,000 in 2014), the effective increase in the payroll tax would be smaller in percentage terms for people who earn more than the taxable maximum than for other workers. Unlike the federal income tax, the Social Security payroll tax is levied at a flat rate starting at the first dollar of wages.

Under current law, the Social Security trust funds will almost certainly become insolvent. The sooner changes are made to the program, the smaller and less abrupt the changes would need to be to maintain solvency. Prompt action would also allow Congress to gradually phase in changes, rather than abruptly cutting benefits or raising taxes, thus allowing workers to plan in advance for their retirements.

Author Contact Information

Acknowledgments

Earlier versions of this report were written by former CRS analysts [author name scrubbed], [author name scrubbed], and Noah Meyerson. All questions should be directed to the current authors.