logo
Trump administration backs off from 100% withholding on Social Security clawbacks

Trump administration backs off from 100% withholding on Social Security clawbacks

Yahoo29-04-2025

The Social Security Administration is backing off a plan it announced in March to withhold 100% of many beneficiaries' monthly payments to claw back money the government had allegedly overpaid them.
Instead, the agency will default to withholding 50% of old-age, survivors, and disability insurance benefits, the agency said in an 'emergency message' to staff dated April 25.
PREVIOUS COVERAGE: Trump administration reverses policy, allows full Social Security overpayment clawbacks
The agency long made it a routine to halt benefits to recoup billions of dollars it sent recipients but later said they should not have received. A policy under the Joe Biden administration to provide relief to beneficiaries, who often live on the fringe of poverty, last year had capped the clawbacks at 10%.
The partial reversal is another twist in the Trump administration's tumultuous approach to Social Security, which has included staff cuts and the acting commissioner's threat, which has since been withdrawn, to essentially shut down the agency.
The emergency message involves the agency's practice of paying beneficiaries money they were not supposed to receive — and then, often after years have passed and the amounts have ballooned to tens of thousands of dollars or more per person — demanding the money back, even if the overpayment was Social Security's fault.
In many cases, recovering the money had entailed withholding 100% of monthly benefits.
Millions of beneficiaries, including people struggling to get by on monthly checks, have received overpayment notices, a 2023 investigation by KFF Health News and Cox Media Group found. Clawbacks have left some homeless, the news organizations reported.
In the aftermath of that reporting, Martin O'Malley, tapped by President Joe Biden in 2023 to head the agency, sought to end what he described as 'grave injustices' that left people 'in dire financial straits.'
In March 2024, O'Malley said the agency would stop 'that clawback cruelty' of intercepting 100% of a beneficiary's monthly check if they fail to respond to a demand for repayment. Instead, the agency would default to withholding 10% of the recipient's monthly benefits, he said.
A year later, the Trump administration reversed that policy change, returning to 100% withholding for new overpayments. 'It is our duty to revise the overpayment repayment policy back to full withholding, as it was during the Obama administration and first Trump administration, to properly safeguard taxpayer funds,' acting Commissioner Lee Dudek said in a March news release.
Now, in a pattern that has played out on multiple fronts during the first 100 days of President Donald Trump's second term, the administration is partly reversing the reversal.
This time, it issued no news release.
'I think that we had the policy right before,' O'Malley said in an interview April 28. 'We looked at the various break points, and if you would depend entirely on your Social Security check, having half of it interrupted means what? That means you go without paying your heating bill for the month; that means you'd go without your medicine instead of buying medicine and food.'
'So it was a cruelhearted policy before,' he added. At 50%, 'it's half as cruel, but it's still cruel.'
Withholding even 50% of monthly benefits will 'cause hardship for many older and disabled people,' said Kathleen Romig, who worked at the Social Security Administration under O'Malley and is now director of Social Security and disability policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 'Going without half a Social Security check would make it harder for many people to afford basic needs like housing, food, and health care,' Romig said.
The SSA press office did not respond to questions for this article.
The emergency message to SSA staff said the new policy applies to overpayment notices sent on or after April 25. In one place, the message said the new withholding rate will be 'up to 50 percent.' If the recipient does not request a lower rate of withholding, reconsideration, or a waiver — and 'if there is no fraud or similar fault' — the agency will begin cutting their benefit payment after about 90 days, it said.
That does not apply to withholding of benefits in the Supplemental Security Income program, which serves people who have disabilities and older adults who have little or no income or resources, as the SSA explains. The agency said in March that withholding of SSI benefits would remain capped at 10%.
Kate Lang, director of federal income security at the advocacy group Justice in Aging, welcomed the shift from 100% withholding but said she was disappointed the agency didn't revert to 10%. Lang called the agency's conduct 'chaotic and confusing.'
ALSO READ: The Social Security data breach compromised 'billions' of accounts. Here's how to protect yourself.
'It creates more work for SSA — more people calling with questions, more errors being made that need to be corrected, more confusion and uncertainty about what is going on,' Lang said.
'It's a nightmare,' O'Malley said, 'for not only the staff to have all of the switcheroo on policy, but also for the beneficiaries.'
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.
VIDEO: Trump administration reverses policy, allows full Social Security overpayment clawbacks

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Judge: Trump administration can dismantle Institute of Museum and Library Services
Judge: Trump administration can dismantle Institute of Museum and Library Services

Los Angeles Times

time34 minutes ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Judge: Trump administration can dismantle Institute of Museum and Library Services

WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Friday denied a request by the American Library Assn. to halt the Trump administration's further dismantling of an agency that funds and promotes libraries across the country, saying that recent court decisions suggested his court lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon had previously agreed to temporarily block the Republican administration, saying that plaintiffs were likely to show that Trump doesn't have the legal authority to unilaterally shutter the Institute of Museum and Library Services, which was created by Congress. But in Friday's ruling, Leon wrote that as much as the 'Court laments the Executive Branch's efforts to cut off this lifeline for libraries and museums,' recent court decisions suggested that the case should be heard in a separate court dedicated to contractual claims. He cited the Supreme Court's decision allowing the administration to cut hundreds of millions of dollars in teacher-training money despite a lower court order barring the cuts, saying that cases seeking reinstatement of federal grants should be heard in the Court of Federal Claims. The American Library Assn. and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees filed a lawsuit to stop the administration from gutting the institute after President Trump signed a March 14 executive order that refers to it and several other federal agencies as 'unnecessary.' The agency's appointed acting director then placed many staff members on administrative leave, sent termination notices to most of them, began canceling grants and contracts and fired all members of the National Museum and Library Services Board. The institute has roughly 75 employees and issued more than $266 million in grants last year. However, a Rhode Island judge's order prohibiting the government from shutting down the institute in a separate case brought by several states remains in place. The administration is appealing that order as well.

Trump says Elon Musk will face ‘very serious consequences' if he funds Dems in future elections
Trump says Elon Musk will face ‘very serious consequences' if he funds Dems in future elections

New York Post

time35 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Trump says Elon Musk will face ‘very serious consequences' if he funds Dems in future elections

WASHINGTON — President Trump warned Saturday that his former ally Elon Musk will face 'very serious consequences' if he starts bankrolling Democratic candidates for office after their nasty public split over a Republican spending bill working its way through Congress. 'If he does, he'll have to pay the consequences for that,' Trump told NBC News' Kristin Welker in an interview. 'He'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that,' the president added. Advertisement 3 Musk and Trump have been feuding after the Tesla CEO spoke out on the president's 'big beautiful' bill. AP 'Is there anything else you just want people to know about the status,' Welker asked. 'No, not at all. We're doing great,' Trump replied. 'The bill is great. It looks like we're going to get it passed. Looks strongly like we're going to get it passed.' Advertisement 3 Musk was part of cabinet meetings during the first few months of Trump's second term. Molly Riley/White House / SWNS Musk knocked Trump during a multi-day X tirade over the debt increases contained in the 'big beautiful bill' earlier this week and said without his hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions, the president would never have been re-elected in 2024. Here is the latest on Donald Trump and Elon Musk's feud He also claimed credit for delivering the GOP a 53-47 majority in the Senate — and holding onto its majority in the House. Advertisement 3 Trump has hit back at Musk's comments in the ongoing feud. The Tesla and SpaceX billionaire contributed more than a quarter of a billion dollars to Republican candidates in the 2024 cycle, federal campaign filings show.

Musk Deletes His ‘Really Big Bomb' Claiming Trump Appears in Epstein Files
Musk Deletes His ‘Really Big Bomb' Claiming Trump Appears in Epstein Files

Gizmodo

time35 minutes ago

  • Gizmodo

Musk Deletes His ‘Really Big Bomb' Claiming Trump Appears in Epstein Files

In the middle of their very public breakup, a scorned Elon Musk decided to drop a 'really big bomb' on Donald Trump, accusing the president of appearing in the Epstein files. Sometime Saturday, it seems the billionaire decided he wanted to try to disarm that bomb, as he deleted his posts claiming that Trump has links to the famous child sex trafficker. Musk and Trump had been acting catty for a couple of days by the time Musk went nuclear, going back and forth over Musk's opposition to Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill'—a proposal that includes the largest cuts to Medicaid and food assistance programs in history. Musk objected to the bill, but not because it would be devastating to low- and middle-income households, but seemingly rather because it was going to hurt his own bottom line by ending electric vehicle tax credits that Tesla benefits from. Musk tried to kill the bill by posting incessantly about it, creating a rift among Republicans who will essentially need everyone in the party to be on board in order to get the thing passed. Trump, annoyed, took some shots at Musk for his dissent, which led to Musk just blowing the whole thing up. He said Trump appeared in the Epstein files and 'That is the real reason they have not been made public.' Funnily, he also doubled down by saying, 'Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out.' Those posts are now deleted—though have, of course, been archived, screenshotted, and quoted many times over. So, too, has a post in which Musk supported the idea that Trump should be impeached. He hasn't gotten around to taking down his post claiming that Trump's tariffs will cause a recession, so, it's clear the two aren't fully ready to make up, even if there is a de-escalation. We're also starting to get more of a picture of what has been happening behind the scenes while these two air out each other in public. A report published Saturday by the Washington Post claims that Trump was 'dejected' during Musk's crash out, and tried to rationalize Musk's behavior by calling him 'a big-time drug addict.' Musk had apparently been acting erratically for quite some time (not exactly a shock if you've scrolled through his posts on Twitter for like, 30 seconds), and a reported physical conflict with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent that saw Musk supposedly throw his shoulder into Bessent was the breaking point where the billionaire started to get pushed out, per the Post. Trump opted not to pour gasoline on the situation—a shocking decision from a guy not exactly known for his restraint—but also is apparently not interested in reconciling with Musk. An official within the administration told the Post that even if they do make up, 'It'll never be the same.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store