Social Security is making it harder for seniors to do routine tasks by phone in latest anti-fraud effort
In its latest effort to thwart fraud, the agency is expanding its online authentication requirement for address changes, claim status requests, benefit verification letters and tax statements, according to a regulatory filing Social Security recently submitted to the Office of Management and Budget. The agency intends to implement the change by August 18.
Advocacy groups, however, are raising concerns that many senior citizens and people with disabilities will not be able to complete the verification process through their mySocialSecurity accounts. The agency said in the filing that it expects 3.4 million people will need to go to field offices annually to complete the tasks.
'For many older Americans, the phone is how they access Social Security services without having to rely on complicated technology or long, difficult, or costly trips to field offices,' Nancy LeaMond, AARP's chief advocacy and engagement officer, wrote in a letter Tuesday to Social Security Commissioner Frank Bisignano.
'We are concerned that under this new policy, older Americans, especially those in rural areas, will have to call, wait on hold for possibly hours, and then wait weeks for an appointment — and in some cases even take time off work — to complete simple transactions they have long been able to do over the phone,' she wrote, urging the commissioner to reconsider the measure.
It currently takes 35 days to get an appointment at a Social Security field office, according to the agency, which has been reducing staff amid a major reorganization.
The new policy is the agency's latest controversial attempt to combat fraud, spurred by the Trump administration. Prior efforts sparked widespread confusion among beneficiaries, who flocked to Social Security's 800 number or field offices, fearing they had to prove their identities in order to continue receiving their monthly payments.
Social Security had to walk back a measure instituted this spring to review retirement benefit applications for fraud after the process created a backlog and flagged only a tiny number of claims for additional verification.
But the agency retained an initiative that bars beneficiaries from changing their direct deposit information by telephone, requiring that they do so through their online accounts or at field offices. That policy is expected to send an additional 1.9 million people to field offices annually.
There is no documentation that requesting address changes and other routine tasks over the phone leads to fraud, said Kathleen Romig, director of Social Security and disability policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
'There's just no evidence that this is a problem,' said Romig, who worked for the agency during the Biden administration.
The new anti-fraud policies will increase field visits by 17%, requiring beneficiaries to spend 3 million hours driving to offices to complete their transactions, she estimated.
The latest effort also aligns with Bisignano's push to have more beneficiaries use the agency's online services to handle their requests. All the tasks that require added verification can be done through mySocialSecurity.
Social Security did not return a request for comment on the regulatory filing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Dolores Huerta Has Seen Farm Raids Before. But Not Like This.
Well, right now, we're trying to stop a detention center here in California City, which is up here in the Mojave Desert. They are offering the people to work in that center $50 an hour. In California, our minimum wage is $16. That's what a lot of workers get. Let's offer farmworkers $50 an hour, the same kind of a salary that you offer the prison guards, and you'll get a lot of American workers. We have very high unemployment in the Central Valley. We have the prison industrial complex, where a lot of our young people are going to prison. So many of these young people don't have to go to prison if they were paid adequately. I'm sure a lot of them would go and do the farm work, especially if they had good wages to do it. And we still have a lot of young people here in the valley that go out during the summers and they do farm work to help their families. I'm sure a lot of people that we now see that are homeless on the streets and that are able to work would go to work if they were paid $50 an hour. So it's just a matter of improving wages? And training, too. Because farm work is hard work. I mean, you've got to be in good physical shape to be able to do farm work. Why are undocumented workers such a large part of the agricultural workforce? Is it just that these are low-paying, hard jobs that Americans don't want to do, or is there more going on? Well, like I said earlier, the growers have denigrated the work so much that people don't realize that this work is dignified. Farm workers are proud of the work that they do. They don't feel that somehow they're a lower class of people because they do farm work. They have pride in their work. If you were to go out there with farm workers, you would be surprised to see that they have dignity, and they care about the work. They care about the plants. When we started the farm workers union way back in the late '50s and early '60s, you would be surprised how many American citizens were out there. Veterans were out there. The Grapes of Wrath was filmed here. All of those workers in that camp were white. It was the 'Okies' and 'Arkies,' the people that came from Oklahoma and Arkansas and those places to work in the fields. They were all white workers. There were some Latino workers, and then over the years, you had the Chinese, you had the Japanese, and different waves of immigrants that came in to do farm work.
Epoch Times
an hour ago
- Epoch Times
A Broadcast Meteorologist's Top Tips for Preparing for the Next Natural Disaster
Americans across the country have already faced a slew of natural disasters this year, from the devastating wildfires that burned across parts of Southern California in January to the deadly flooding that swept through Central Texas in July. The spate of natural catastrophes in the first half of 2025 alone caused approximately $131 billion in overall economic losses, according to a July 29 report from the insurance company Munich Re.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
There's a better approach for Trump to change Putin's calculus
On Monday, President Trump set a new 10 to 12-day ultimatum for President Vladimir Putin to enter peace talks over Ukraine or face a new tariff regime intended to halt global sales of Russian energy products. Trump is promising a 100 percent 'secondary tariff' on any country that imports Russian energy products, targeting India, China, Turkey and others. He's right to recognize that pressuring the Kremlin's main cash cow is a way to grab Putin's attention, but his approach is counterproductive and incomplete. There are two ways to change Putin's plans in Ukraine. The first is to stop Russia's ability to wage its war of choice by constraining its finances. Oil and gas sales account for about a quarter of the Kremlin's budget. The G7, including the U.S., has taken steps since the onset of the war to lower Russia's energy revenues. Last month, the Kremlin's tax proceeds from energy sales were at their lowest since January 2023; however, the Russian government still pocketed about $6 billion. This shows the tradeoff in the G7's initial goal — dent Russian revenues without fully blocking the sale of Russian oil. The G7 has attempted this balancing act because Russian oil exports still make up 7 percent of global oil supply and a full shut-in would roil energy markets across the world. Trump's new plan proposes to do exactly that. To stave off the threat of U.S. tariffs, importing countries may stop accepting Russian oil. Without Russia's 7 million barrels per day of oil exports on the market, global crude oil prices could shoot up almost 25 percent, even assuming other suppliers like OPEC have the capacity and desire to pick up half the slack. Prices at the pump in America would then climb just as tariff-induced inflation hits the economy at a time when nearly two-thirds of Americans disapprove of Trump's handling of inflation. The other scenario, in which some importers defy Trump's threat, is not much better. The imposed secondary tariffs would further ignite inflation in America, especially if they target Chinese imports. Another ratcheting up of tariffs timed simultaneously with increases we saw in bilateral tariffs yesterday could destabilize Wall Street's equity markets again, all while quickening price increases on Main Street. Putin understands these dynamics; that's why the secondary tariff threat won't bring him to the table. It's true that blocking the sales of Russian oil would be a massive hit to the Kremlin, but he sees this as an empty threat because the plan is costly not just to Russia but to the whole world and, in particular, America. Instead, Trump can implement a different tariff to attack Russia's revenues without causing collateral chaos. With existing authorities, the Trump administration can impose sanctions on any company or individual in the world involved in a Russian oil and gas sale. Wanting to maintain access to America's financial system, most will seek to avoid sanctions. The U.S. could permit transactions if Russia pays a shipment fee on each sale — a Russian universal tariff — to the Treasury Department. From there, the U.S. could ratchet this tariff up month by month if Putin drags his feet on negotiating. Financially squeezed over time, Putin will feel increasingly boxed in. The second way to change Putin's calculus is by fortifying Ukraine financially and militarily. Right now, the Kremlin sees global support for Ukraine waning, with citizens in America and Europe fatigued of funding a foreign war. But we don't need to rely on our own taxpayers to back the Ukrainian people. Instead, the U.S. and G7 should seize the $300 billion worth of Russian sovereign assets already frozen in our countries and commit them to supporting Ukraine's defense and reconstruction. Doing so will foil one of Putin's main strategies. Despite a standstill on the battlefield, he thinks he can bring Ukraine to its knees by destroying its economy. That will prove much harder if Ukraine can access Russia's frozen assets. In addition to financial support, Trump and Congress should commit to providing Ukraine with the military resources it needs to continue defending itself. After the 2024 election, Putin thinks he can wait out Ukraine's limited arsenal. Trump needs to flip the script and make clear that a war of attrition is not winnable for Russia. His decision to unpause previously approved military assistance was a good first step. But to force a rethink from Russia, Trump must go further. Committing to arming Ukraine with the weapons made by American workers and companies until Russia agrees to and upholds a ceasefire will do just that. After years of prolonged conflict and unnecessary death, there is a clear need to force Putin's hand. President Trump's instinct is right, but his approach is wrong. To get Russia off the battlefield and to the table, he must delineate a plan that makes negotiating Putin's best option, and that is one that hinders the Russian war machine, helps Ukraine and garners support from Americans and our allies.
