|

Recession Puts a
Major Strain On Social Security Trust Fund
As Payroll Tax Revenue Falls, So Does Surplus
By Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
March 31, 2009
The U.S. recession is wreaking havoc on yet another front: the
Social Security trust fund.
With unemployment rising, the payroll tax revenue that finances
Social Security benefits for nearly 51 million retirees and other
recipients is falling, according to a report from the Congressional
Budget Office. As a result, the trust fund's annual surplus is forecast
to all but vanish next year -- nearly a decade ahead of schedule
-- and deprive the government of billions of dollars it had been
counting on to help balance the nation's books.
While the new numbers will not affect payments to current Social
Security recipients, experts say, the disappearing surplus could
have considerable implications for the government's already grim
financial situation.
The Treasury Department has for decades borrowed money from the
Social Security trust fund to finance government operations. If
it is no longer able to do so, it could be forced to borrow an additional
$700 billion over the next decade from China, Japan and other investors.
And at some point, perhaps as early as 2017, according to the CBO,
the Treasury would have to start repaying the billions it has borrowed
from the trust fund over the past 25 years, driving the nation further
into debt or forcing Congress to raise taxes.
The new forecast is fueling calls for reform of the Social Security
system from conservative analysts, who say it underscores the financial
fragility of a system that provides a primary source of income for
millions of Americans.
"It suggests we better get working on Social Security and
stop burying our heads in the sand," said Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.),
the senior Republican on the Senate Budget Committee. "The
Social Security trust fund, though technically in balance, is going
to put huge pressures on taxpayers very soon."
Many liberal analysts reject the notion that Social Security needs
fixing, arguing that the system is projected to fully support payments
to beneficiaries through 2041 -- so long as the Treasury repays
its debts. But they agree that the news is not good for the federal
budget.
"This is not a problem for Social Security, it's a problem
for fiscal responsibility," said Christian Waller, a public
policy professor at the University of Massachusetts at Boston and
a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. He said the
new estimates would force President Obama and his budget director,
Peter Orszag, "to stay on track in what they have set out to
do, and that is rein in deficits."
The CBO, Congress's nonpartisan budget scorekeeper, released its
most recent estimates for the Social Security trust fund last week
as part of its final budget projections for the fiscal year that
begins in October.
The trust fund has long taken in more in revenue from payroll taxes
and other sources than it pays out in benefits. Last August, the
CBO predicted that surplus would exceed $80 billion this year and
next, then rise to around $90 billion before slowly evaporating
by 2020. But the rapidly deteriorating economy -- particularly the
loss of more than 4 million jobs -- has driven those numbers much
lower much faster, with the surplus expected to hit $16 billion
this year and only $3 billion next year, then vanish entirely by
2017.
CBO is not the official arbiter of the trust fund's health; that
task falls to the Social Security trustees, a panel of Cabinet secretaries
and others who are expected to issue a new report later this spring.
In his budget, Obama predicted that the trust fund surplus would
hit $30 billion this year, according to Mark Lassiter, a spokesman
for the Social Security Administration.
But that number, too, is far less than the $80 billion the trustees
had forecast for 2009. In addition to declining revenues, Lassiter
said the system is likely to incur higher expenses due to big jumps
in new retirement and disability claims. Both are expected to rise
by at least 12 percent this year compared with 2008.
"There are some people who are, in fact, delaying retirement"
because the plunging stock market took a huge bite out of their
retirement accounts, Lassiter said. "But the stronger trend
is that people who are losing a job are looking for other sources
of income. And if you're of retirement age, you're going to go ahead
and file for Social Security benefits."
Though Obama has pledged to address the precarious financial situation
of Social Security, the administration currently has no plans to
do so. Under pressure from congressional Democrats who argued that
Social Security should not be at the top of the new administration's
agenda, the White House last month dropped a proposal to name a
task force to reexamine the program.
During the campaign, Obama proposed applying payroll taxes to annual
earnings over $250,000 help fund Social Security after the surplus
vanishes. With the new numbers, some analysts said, the president
might be forced to step up the timetable.
"Over the past 25 years, the government has gotten used to
the fact that Social Security is providing free money to make the
rest of the deficit look smaller," said Andrew Biggs, a resident
scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. "Now they've
essentially got to pay their own way, at least a little more fully.
"Instead of Social Security subsidizing the rest of the budget,"
he said, "the rest of the budget will have to subsidize Social
Security."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/30/AR2009033003291.html
|