About the Project | Contact Us | Search

cato.org
Its Your Money, Your Choice, Your Future
Cato Institute
Project on Social Security Choice Project on Social Security Choice

Reform and YOU
Social Security Toolkit

Cato's Plan
Get Involved
Press Room
Congressional Corner


Join Us in our efforts —
we need your support.

Donate Today!
 

GOP Pushes End to 1993 Hike in Taxes on Social Security Benefits

July 27, 2000

House Republicans are moving to repeal the increased incomes taxes on Social Security benefits that were instituted as part of the Clinton administration's 1993 budget plan. However, many fear that the repeal would both deny funds to Medicare and open the door to general revenue funding of Social Security.

The 1983 Social Security amendments made up to 50 percent of a retiree's benefits subject to income taxes for single beneficiaries with incomes over $25,000 and couples with incomes over $32,000. The Clinton administration's 1993 budget deal raised taxation to 85 percent of benefits for single beneficiaries with incomes over $34,000 and couples over $44,000.

Approximately 19 percent of Social Security beneficiaries, 9 million in all, pay the higher tax, according to the Social Security Administration. Affected retirees would pay an average $1,180 tax on their Social Security benefits in 2001, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. The proceeds of this tax are credited to the Medicare trust fund, which faces funding deficits even sooner than Social Security.

The Senate voted two weeks ago to repeal the 1993 tax increase, and on Wednesday the House Ways and Means Committee passed H.R. 4865 , the "Social Security Benefits Tax Relief Act," by a vote of 22-15. The legislation would repeal the 85-percent taxation of Social Security benefits, returning the maximum amount of Social Security benefits included in gross income to the 50 percent level prior to the 1993 changes. It would make up the lost income to the Medicare trust fund with general revenue transfers.

Proponents of the bill say it repeals an unfair tax and that the extra income for some seniors would make it easier for them to purchase prescription drugs. Critics like the Concord Coalition believe the tax elimination is "an election year tax break [for] higher income seniors" that "is not wise fiscal policy." The repeal would deny Medicare of $100 billion in dedicated revenue over the next ten years and $464 billion through 2024.

Also of concern is how these missing funds would be made up: out of on-budget surpluses. However desirable it may be to repeal the tax on Social Security benefits, this legislation constitutes an open-ended commitment of general revenues to Medicare. Vice President Gore's Social Security plan is based upon the same idea, and has been criticized by many for it. "In their eagerness to give a tax cut, Republicans may have been too clever for their own good," said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition.

"To avoid harming Medicare, Republicans have implicitly endorsed Gore's approach to Social Security reform, which is to shore up the trust fund with future general revenues."

2001 Index | 2000 Index | 1999 Index | 1998 Index





Printer Friendly Version


  Quick Facts Archive  
  The Supreme Court ruled in Flemming v. Nestor that there is no legal right to Social Security benefits.
[Details...]
 
Research Corner
 

BROWSE BY TOPIC

Social Security's Financial Crisis
Rate of Return Issues
Women, Minorities, and the Poor
Other Reasons for Social Security Reform
Government Investment of Social Security
Social Security Reform Plans
International Pension Reform
Transition Financing
Problems and Criticisms
Public Opinion and Polling

BROWSE BY AUTHOR Go

BROWSE BY TYPE Go

 
 

"For the White House, Cato is an indispensable source of expertise-with two decades of pro-privatization research and lobbying under its belt, it knows more about the issue (of Social Security) than just about anyone else in Washington."

- Ryan Lizza
The New Republic
August 13, 2001