Latest news with #HowardGleckman
Axios
07-07-2025
- Business
- Axios
That Social Security email about the "big, beautiful bill," explained
Millions of Americans got a confusing email from the Social Security Administration over the weekend, celebrating the passage of the "big, beautiful bill." Why it matters: It's unusual for the agency to blast an overtly political message to its massive email list, which includes retirees and those who've signed up at their website. Tax experts, former agency leaders and advocates for the agency are criticizing the email for spreading misinformation. Zoom in: The email claims that the spending bill "eliminates federal income taxes on Social Security benefits for most beneficiaries." It says this elimination is in addition to providing "an enhanced deduction for taxpayers aged 65 and older, ensuring that retirees can keep more of what they have earned." Reality check: The big bill does contain a big temporary tax break for seniors, who get an enhanced deduction on their federal income tax for the next four years. That will mean fewer seniors will pay taxes on benefits until 2028. However, the bill does not eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits — though President Trump and the White House keep claiming it does. "There is no provision in the budget bill that directly 'eliminates' or even reduces taxes on Social Security benefits," Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, told the Washington Post. By the numbers: The email appears to have gone out to everyone who is signed up for a "My Social Security" account — that's 71 million people. What they're saying: While the agency has sent out press releases, or tweets, from time to time that could be viewed as political, sending a mass email like this to this large a list is something new, say experts. "The Social Security Administration's communications shop has been politicized," wrote Nathan Osburn, a former deputy commissioner for the agency, on LinkedIn. "I agree," replied Leland Dudek, who was the acting commissioner of the agency, appointed by Trump, during the first few months of the year. The email confused some people who aren't used to hearing from the Social Security agency, says Kathleen Romig, a former senior adviser at the agency. "I've gotten a lot of correspondence from people who never hear from SSA except an annual notice to check their account," said Romig, who is now a director at the liberal Center on Policy and Budget Priorities. Some of them thought it was a scam, she added, claiming the email was "unprecedented." The other side: A Social Security official tells Axios that the agency was just trying to communicate helpful information.
Boston Globe
06-07-2025
- Business
- Boston Globe
Social security email says policy bill eliminates tax on benefits. Does it?
The email, which went out Thursday, said the new law 'includes a provision that eliminates federal income taxes on Social Security benefits for most beneficiaries,' and, 'additionally, it provides an enhanced deduction for taxpayers aged 65 and older.' Advertisement But the enhanced deduction will help reduce households' tax bills on their overall income, including Social Security income. 'The SSA statement implies there is a direct tax cut on Social Security benefits,' said Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank, 'which there is not.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Instead, older single filers will get the extra $6,000 deduction ($12,000 for couples), as long as their income falls under a certain ceiling (below $75,000 for single filers or $150,000 for married joint filers). Above those income levels, the deduction begins to decrease, and it goes away once single taxpayers' income reaches $175,000 ($250,000 for couples). Nor will the extra deduction benefit all Social Security recipients. Retirees who are 62 through 64 are ineligible. And since the income of more than half of Social Security recipients is too low to be taxed anyway, lower income people won't be helped much. The new break is expected to benefit middle- and upper-middle-class households, tax policy experts said. (Recipients who earn less than $63,300 owe an average of 1% of their Social Security benefits in taxes, according to an analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.) Advertisement The Tax Policy Center estimates that less than half of older adults, most of whom earn about $50,000 to $200,000, will get some benefit from the new deduction, though most of them will still owe some tax, Gleckman added. Under current law, an estimated 64% of beneficiaries did not owe taxes on their Social Security benefit, and the new deduction would boost that number to 88%, according to an analysis in June from the White House Council of Economic Advisers. This article originally appeared in
CNBC
03-06-2025
- Business
- CNBC
6 Nobel prize-winning economists wrote a letter opposing Trump's budget bill: 'We have grave concerns'
The multitrillion-dollar tax and spending package House Republicans passed last month is heading to the Senate, with lawmakers hoping to pass a finalized bill by July 4. If passed in its current form, the bill — dubbed the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" — would, among other measures, make President Donald Trump's 2017 tax cuts permanent and add new tax breaks for tipped and overtime workers as well as older Americans. The bill's critics are hoping it may see some change's in Congress's upper house. Those include six Nobel-prize winning economists, who this week penned an open letter published through the Economic Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank. "As economists who have devoted our careers to researching how economies can grow and how the benefits of this growth can be translated into broadly shared prosperity and security, we have grave concerns about the budget reconciliation bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on May 22, 2025," the letter says. The economists' main issue: cuts to Medicaid (the federal and state health-care program for low-income and disabled Americans) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly known as food stamps), which they see as essential for American families. The House version of the bill would cut Medicaid spending by $700 billion and slash SNAP by $300 billion — the largest cut in either program's history. "These steep cuts to the social safety net are being undertaken to defray the staggering cost of the tax cuts included in the House bill, including the hidden cost of preserving the large corporate income tax cut passed in the 2017 tax law," the letter says. "But even these sharp spending cuts will pay for far less than half of the tax cuts (not even including the cost of maintaining the corporate income tax cuts of the 2017 law)." These and other critics of the bill cite research that estimates the law will add to the national deficit — to tune of about $3 trillion to $5 trillion over the next decade, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget — while failing to lift up low-income Americans. "Given how much this bill adds to the U.S. debt, it is shocking that it still imposes absolute losses on the bottom 40% of U.S. households," the letter says. It remains to be seen if spending cuts will remain in the bill as-is. "Overall, the [Senate] bill is not going to be that much different," Howard Gleckman, senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, recently told CNBC, but added that he expects "a lot of debate" about the Medicaid provision in particular. One set of provisions — making the tax rates and brackets from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent — would maintain the status quo for taxpayers. That law's tax cuts, which were set to expire at the end of the year, included a major hike to the standard deduction, which "greatly simplified the tax code for millions of taxpayers," say analysts at the Tax Foundation. Proponents of the bill say these and other tax cuts will spark U.S. economic growth and laud the administration for delivering on several campaign trail promises. When it comes to cutting spending on social programs, Trump sees the reductions as an exercise in government efficiency. "We don't want any waste, fraud or abuse," he said in a recent Newsmax interview. "Other than that, we're leaving it." The economic Nobelists don't see it that way. "The House bill addresses none of the nation's key economic challenges usefully and exacerbates many of them," they write. "The Senate should refuse to pass this bill and start over from scratch on the budget." ,
Boston Globe
02-06-2025
- Health
- Boston Globe
How Trump's planned Medicaid cuts would hurt older women
Since women on average live longer than men, they are more likely to have to stretch their more meager savings and retirement income over more years. There are More women than men age 65 and older are low-income, meaning their Advertisement Since women live longer than men, they are also more likely to suffer the ailments of age. According to the Advertisement This brings us to Medicaid, the main public program paying for long-term care. According to KFF, Medicaid accounts for Since many more beneficiaries receiving Medicaid-covered long-term care are women, they would be most affected by cuts to Medicaid. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the anticipated cuts would result in Speaking on the PBS 'NewsHour,' Jennifer Tolbert of KFF explained that the bill rescinds a rule 'that made it easier for seniors and people with disabilities who also have Medicare coverage to enroll in Medicaid, which will then pay for their premiums and cost-sharing, as well as provide them access to supplemental benefits that Medicare doesn't provide, including long-term care, dental benefits, as well as vision care.' Advertisement It could also mean many more seniors being forced to move to nursing homes. As Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow in the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center at the Urban Institute, explained to me, while Medicaid coverage of nursing home care is mandatory, coverage of home health care is discretionary. So to save funds, states are likely to cut back on the discretionary services they now cover. Without home health care assistance, many more families would have to make the difficult choice of placing parents and grandparents in nursing homes, where the quality of care would be likely to deteriorate as states reduce what they pay providers. This would also adversely affect women who are caregivers, both paid and unpaid. While the statistics vary, up to Further, many family caregivers would be likely to be thrown off Medicaid themselves under the expanded work requirements in the House Republican bill. According to KFF, All these funding reductions are meant to reduce a federal deficit that is projected to balloon with Advertisement Fortunately, the Republicans may not have the votes to put this devil's bargain through. Even Senator Josh Hawley,
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
$4,000 'Senior Bonus' Tax Break Proposed — But Critics Say It's A Consolation Prize For Broken Social Security Promises
A new proposal from House Republicans could give adults age 65 and older an additional $4,000 tax deduction starting this year. Currently being called the "senior bonus," the provision is part of a broader tax bill under consideration — but it's drawing mixed reactions from experts and advocates who argue it falls short of President Donald Trump's campaign promises to eliminate taxes on Social Security benefits. The proposed deduction would apply to taxpayers age 65 and older, regardless of whether they take the standard deduction or itemize. However, eligibility is subject to income limits. The deduction begins to phase out for individuals with modified adjusted gross income above $75,000 and for couples filing jointly who earn more than $150,000. Don't Miss: Hasbro, MGM, and Skechers trust this AI marketing firm — Deloitte's fastest-growing software company partners with Amazon, Walmart & Target – If passed, the provision would be temporary, lasting from 2025 through 2028. Supporters say it would ease the tax burden on seniors living on fixed or modest incomes. "It's not nothing, but it's also not life changing," Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, told CNBC. He estimated that a retiree earning around $50,000 annually might save just under $500 a year in taxes with this new deduction. The proposal comes after Trump campaigned on a promise to eliminate federal taxes on Social Security benefits — a pledge that has not materialized. Due to Senate rules, Social Security reforms cannot be included in reconciliation bills, which are often used to pass budget-related legislation. Instead, lawmakers have opted for a smaller, more affordable measure. Andrew Biggs, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, told MarketWatch that eliminating taxes on Social Security would be expensive and hasten the depletion of the Social Security trust fund. "Eliminating benefit taxation was neither affordable nor necessary in the first place," he said. "But retirees looking forward to a big tax cut might be disappointed." Trending: Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing — Experts agree that fully removing taxes on benefits would be far more costly. Garrett Watson, director of policy at the Tax Foundation, told CNBC that the senior bonus would cost about $200 billion over 10 years if made permanent, compared to over $1 trillion for eliminating benefit taxes. Many seniors already pay taxes on a portion of their Social Security income. Depending on their combined income — which includes adjusted gross income, nontaxable interest, and half of their Social Security benefits — up to 85% of benefits can be taxed. Because income thresholds for taxing benefits have not changed since the 1980s, more retirees are now paying taxes, even as inflation and wages rise. Advocates argue that the system is due for reform. "While the proposed $4,000 deduction in the tax bill may provide some relief to lower- and middle-income Social Security beneficiaries, it doesn't address the fundamental issue of fairness in taxing Social Security benefits," Shannon Benton, executive director of the Senior Citizens League, told MarketWatch. Benton emphasized that many seniors will continue to face a significant tax burden despite the proposed House Ways and Means Committee has started reviewing the legislation. If it moves forward and gains support in Congress, the senior bonus could take effect next year. Still, critics caution that while the deduction may offer short-term tax relief, it doesn't resolve long-standing concerns about Social Security's financial future — or the taxes retirees continue to pay on benefits they've already earned. While the proposed $4,000 "senior bonus" deduction could slightly reduce taxes for some older Americans, it is far from the sweeping reform that many had hoped for. As Social Security's trust funds inch closer to depletion, the debate over how best to support retirees is far from over. Read Next: Nancy Pelosi Invested $5 Million In An AI Company Last Year — 'Scrolling To UBI' — Deloitte's #1 fastest-growing software company allows users to earn money on their phones. Image: Shutterstock UNLOCKED: 5 NEW TRADES EVERY WEEK. Click now to get top trade ideas daily, plus unlimited access to cutting-edge tools and strategies to gain an edge in the markets. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? APPLE (AAPL): Free Stock Analysis Report TESLA (TSLA): Free Stock Analysis Report This article $4,000 'Senior Bonus' Tax Break Proposed — But Critics Say It's A Consolation Prize For Broken Social Security Promises originally appeared on © 2025 Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
