President Donald Trump’s pledge to shield Social Security from harm has led to a new initiative aiming to reduce government overhead. By slashing administrative costs — from IT contracts to property leases — the Trump administration claims to be saving the program around $800 million annually.
These measures are designed to improve efficiency and reduce what the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) labels as “non-essential spending”.
The program, however, remains financially strained. The long-predicted funding gap is now closer than ever. And experts agree: even with these cuts, Social Security is still heading for across-the-board benefit reductions unless structural changes are made soon.
£800 Million Saved, But Structural Deficit Remains Unchanged
While the cost-cutting measures may appear substantial, they represent a fraction of Social Security’s overall budgetary challenges. According to the Social Security Trustees, the program is expected to run a $180.7 billion deficit this year alone. Trump’s savings, while not insignificant, reduce this figure only marginally.
DOGE has targeted a wide range of expenditures: staff reductions, cancelled property leases, renegotiated IT services and more. These are expected to cumulatively generate the annual $800 million in savings.
Despite these efforts, the fundamental drivers of the program’s financial imbalance remain untouched. According to the Trustees’ report, the Social Security Trust Fund — the financial cushion that supports benefits — is projected to be exhausted by 2033. After that point, only around 79% of scheduled benefits can be paid out using incoming payroll tax revenue.
The imbalance is driven by demographic shifts: baby boomers retiring, people living longer, and declining birth rates, which reduce the number of working-age contributors.
True Reform Requires Tougher Policy Choices
The root causes of Social Security’s predicament lie not in administrative inefficiency but in structural demographic trends. Solutions, experts warn, will almost certainly involve unpopular decisions.
According to analysts, meaningful reform will likely require raising payroll taxes, increasing the retirement age, or modifying benefit formulas.
None of these measures currently align with President Trump’s public policy stance. On the contrary, he has advocated for eliminating taxes on Social Security benefits — a move that, while popular, would reduce program revenues further.
Many policy proposals, such as adjusting the cap on taxable income or revising early retirement penalties, remain politically contentious. Yet these are the levers widely viewed as essential for avoiding abrupt benefit cuts.