|
Publication Date: December 12, 2005 Permanent Link: http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=411260 The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. Note: This report is available in its entirety in the Portable Document Format (PDF). The text below is a portion of the complete document. IntroductionWhile Social Security's long-term financial imbalance has been known for many years, it has recently received increased attention due to the current administration making Social Security reform a legislative priority. Much of 2005's debate has focused on incorporating private accounts into the system, although the accounts themselves would do little to address Social Security's financial shortfall.1 Most analysts agree that either additional revenue needs to be raised or benefits need to be reduced below the levels scheduled in current law. To date, reform proposals introduced in Congress have focused on reducing benefits as the way to achieve solvency, although some experts have developed options that include tax increases.2 The purpose of this study is to examine which demographic and economic groups will be affected more than others in 2050 under various options for reducing benefits. The study compares the projected distribution of benefits under current law with benefits projected under four options: (1) indexing benefits by price growth instead of wage growth; (2) indexing benefits by price growth for high-income workers and by wages for low-income workers (progressive price indexing); (3) reducing the annual cost of living adjustment after retirement; and (4) raising the normal retirement age. Policy Scenarios The analysis includes simulations of the following policy scenarios:
Notes from this section of the report 2 For proposals that reduce benefits see Commission to Strengthen Social Security (2001), Pozen (2005), Senator Bennett's proposal — http://bennett.senate.gov/press/documents/?062205bennett_sossummary.pdf, H.R. 440 (Kolbe and Boyd—109th Congress), H.R. 530 (Johnson—109th Congress), and S. 540 (Hagel—109th Congress). For proposals that increase revenues see Diamond and Orszag (2004), H.R. 440 (Kolbe and Boyd—109th Congress), and H.R. 2472 (Wexler—109th Congress). 3 The Social Security Board of Trustees (2005) and the Congressional Budget Office (2005) project the trust funds will be depleted by 2041 and 2044, respectively. 4 Benefits would be reduced for all types of recipients, including spouse, survivor, and disability beneficiaries. 5 The rate of indexing for those with lifetime earnings between the 30th percentile and maximum covered earnings would gradually decline with lifetime earnings. 6 The analysis assumes annual COLAs of 2.8 percent under current law and 2.4 percent under the reduced scenario. 7 COLAs can affect initial benefits because they begin at the year of first eligibility (attainment of age 62, disability, or death) as opposed to the year of first benefit receipt. Note: This report is available in its entirety in the Portable Document Format (PDF). Results for highlights of price indexing and progressive price indexing. Related Publications
Other Publications by the AuthorsThe nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. Usage, posting and reprint of materials on the UI web site: Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site in PDF format. This information may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required. Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact paffairs@urban.org. If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687. |