A False Sense Of Security? The Latest Turmoil At The Social Security Administration

So, has the new year brought improved conditions at the Social Security Administration? As we highlighted throughout 2025, disruptions from government cost-cutting efforts, along with fewer offices and staff at the Social Security Administration, all combined to mean that Social Security recipients were experiencing significant and at times unresolvable problems connected to the receipt of their payments. Unfortunately, there is not much improvement to report at the beginning of 2026, and there is concern that things could get far worse. As a recent report in The Washington Post revealed, Social Security’s own internal data shows that sweeping cuts enacted last year have caused deteriorating customer service for recipients. There’s a backlog of millions of cases awaiting attention and resolution, as thousands of employees have been fired or have resigned, and those left standing appear to be poorly trained for jobs that have direct consumer interactions. (One report even suggests that callers to the agency who are so stressed as to be considering suicide are told by SSA staff that suicide is only one option to consider!) To be fair, the Social Security Administration has been shortchanged with budget cuts for years before the current administration, but things have now reached a crisis level, with calls at a 6-year high and call-back times, if they occur at all, often taking longer than an hour. Moreover, as of March 7th, the Social Security Administration is changing how they distribute the workload among staff. Instead of local offices handling local cases, cases will now be handled at the national level, which means that national staff will need to be aware of the local idiosyncrasies of each state that may affect benefit decisions and payouts. Because every state has different laws and regulations concerning such issues as marriage (common law marriages are legal in some states but not others, for example), there is concern that nationalizing the system for addressing and resolving problems will leave some with misinformation or even miscalculation of benefits.

There is also mounting evidence that the security and privacy of your personal Social Security information that is stored on government computers may have been compromised. It has now been widely reported by multiple outlets that last year, DOGE staff inappropriately accessed and misused Social Security data and shared that data without permission with groups trying to demonstrate election fraud. Data was shared on unauthorized third-party servers despite court rulings disallowing this, so the security of such data is now in question. Who knows who may now have access to your personal information contained in Social Security’s online data storage? Moreover, according to a recent post on Wired, Social Security workers are now being ordered to hand over to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) information concerning in-person appointments at Social Security, further politicizing the agency in a way not previously seen and jeopardizing information and data that have previously been kept confidential. So it appears that the security and privacy of your information at Social Security may be imperiled and may be easier to obtain by unauthorized and even criminal actors intent on causing harm. It is recommended that you “lock” your social security number through a few different methods to lessen the likelihood that someone with unauthorized access or someone who finds your social security number on the dark web could cause you serious trouble. To find out how to do this, put your card under lock and key and click here.

But these problems may pale in comparison to the even bigger problem with Social Security: the trust fund that has been supplementing the funds available to recipients has been reported to be running out of money even earlier than previously reported. According to a new report from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, it is now projected that the Social Security Trust Fund will be depleted by the beginning of the fiscal year 2032, which actually means October of 2031. This could potentially lead to a benefit cut for both current recipients and future recipients of at least 20% or possibly even higher. Some of this is due to the impact of the One Big Beautiful Bill, signed into law in 2025. Given that 40% of Americans rely on Social Security for at least ½ of their income and almost 15% of Americans rely on Social Security for at least 90% of their income, this size of a benefit cut could cause serious problems and send millions of older Americans into poverty-level subsistence. In essence, the can that has been kicked down the road for a long time has little place to go at this point. There is simply not enough money coming into the system from today’s workers to go to today’s recipients. As one source made clear, this level of cut means that instead of buying groceries, many will be forced to skip meals.

Is there a fix to be had for this mess? Some experts believe we are beyond the point of fixing the current system. The fixes need to come soon if we are to avoid the catastrophe of growing senior poverty. Among possible solutions are raising the retirement age, cutting benefits for future recipients, or increasing revenue into the system. One particular focus is on whether extraordinarily wealthy individuals are sufficiently paying into the system and whether they should be equally eligible for benefits. Currently, as long as you have worked in a job where you’ve contributed to the Social Security system, you are eligible to receive benefits, even if you are a billionaire. And yes, the recently retired 95-year-old Warren Buffett is likely receiving Social Security at this point. So the question becomes, have we come to the point where recipients should be “means-tested” to see if it makes sense to give them Social Security benefits, given dwindling revenue in the system? Alternatively, as we only currently tax income up to $184,500 for Social Security, and given the need for new revenue into the system, should we be taxing individuals at a certain income or wealth level substantially more? Some experts and advocates are arguing for just that: that is, have we reached the point where, rather than cutting benefits for our general elderly population, we should instead ask our wealthy citizens to pay more into the system. Given the preferential tax cuts and other perks afforded to wealthy individuals in our country, the time may be near to fortify the Social Security system with a little help from our (wealthy) friends.