The issue has renewed debate over the future of one of the United States’ largest public programs. In a question-and-answer interview published by Rutgers, Social Security law expert Jon Dubin outlined the legal, financial, and policy implications of the projected funding shortfall while discussing the options currently under consideration.
Social Security continues to receive revenue through payroll taxes paid by American workers. According to Rutgers, Dubin said that 184.7 million people contributed to the system through Federal Insurance Contribution Act (FICA) payroll deductions in 2025. For that reason, he rejected the idea that Social Security is simply “running out of money,” even while acknowledging that the trust fund may no longer be able to pay full scheduled benefits as early as 2032.
Automatic Benefit Reductions Would Affect Current and Future Recipients
According to Rutgers, Dubin said that if Congress does not strengthen trust fund financing within the next six years, Social Security recipients would face automatic across-the-board benefit reductions of approximately 20% to 24%. He explained that available resources would cover only about 76% to 80% of scheduled benefits once the trust fund reaches projected depletion.
The impact would vary among recipients, although many households depend heavily on these payments. Dubin noted that between 52% and 56% of beneficiaries receive at least half of their total income from Social Security, while roughly 24% to 27% depend on the program for 90% or more of their income. He described a reduction of that size as significant for most recipients and devastating for at least one-quarter of them.
Dubin also said the effects would not be evenly distributed, according to the same source. He stated that Black and Latino recipients would likely experience greater hardship because their poverty rates are about twice those of white recipients and because they generally have less accumulated wealth, savings, pensions, or retirement plans available as financial support.
Women would also face greater hardship because poverty rates among female recipients are about two percentage points higher than those of men. People receiving Social Security disability insurance would also be affected because a somewhat larger share already lives in poverty. Dubin added that recipients living in or near poverty could struggle to pay for housing, utilities, food, clothing, and medical expenses not covered elsewhere.
Congress Faces Multiple Policy Choices as Debate Continues
The Rutgers interview also addressed the policy options that lawmakers have discussed. Dubin said proposals have included lifting or raising the Social Security payroll tax cap, increasing payroll tax rates, reducing benefits, or raising the retirement age.
According to Rutgers, he argued that increasing revenue by raising or eliminating the payroll tax cap, or extending Social Security taxes to investment and business pass-through income, would primarily affect higher earners. By contrast, increasing payroll tax rates would affect all workers, while benefit reductions or a higher retirement age would have the greatest impact on people who rely most heavily on Social Security income.
Dubin also discussed why previous proposals have not advanced. He pointed to opposition among many members of Congress and the current Trump administration to measures that increase taxes on higher-income Americans, along with the political difficulty of either raising taxes or reducing benefits.
Looking ahead, Dubin urged lawmakers to act promptly while preserving Social Security’s historical structure and avoiding policies that would harm those most dependent on the program. He also highlighted proposals that would strengthen benefits for low-income workers, family caregivers, and individuals with long histories of physically demanding work.
