
|

Social Security Basics
|
What is Social Security? Who is Eligible for Social Security? How Are Benefit Levels Determined? Social Security Reduces Elderly Poverty The Nine Guiding Principles of Social Security Fast Facts Official Resources
|
What is Social Security? |
Social Security is a contributory social insurance program providing benefits
to millions of Americans. Workers contribute financially to the system during
their careers and earn entitlement to family benefits upon retirement, disability,
or death. In 2002, more than 47 million Americans received benefits under the
Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Disability Insurance (OASDI) programs that
make up Social Security. This group included some 32 million elderly retirees
and their dependents, more than 7 million disabled workers and their dependents,
and nearly 7 million survivors of deceased workers. (See Figure A.) Almost 4
million of those receiving OASDI benefits are children. (See the 2003 Annual
Statistical Supplement here.)
Source: Annual
Statistical Supplement to the Social Security Bulletin, 2003 (Washington,
D.C.: Social Security Administration, July 2004), Table
5.A1.
|
|
|
Who is Eligible for Social Security? |
Eligibility for benefits is earned through workers’ payroll tax contributions.
As noted, nearly all workers in the United States are required to contribute
to the Social Security program. All citizens and those with legal alien status
who work and pay contributions for the required number of quarters (forty, that
is, ten years) are eligible for pension benefits when they reach the minimum
retirement age; survivor and disability benefits also require certain minimum
work credits. To qualify as disabled, individuals must have a prolonged or terminal
condition and may not earn more than $810 per month.
Under certain circumstances, a worker’s spouse, children, and parents may
qualify for Social Security benefits based on the worker’s contribution
history. Unmarried children under age eighteen (or over eighteen if severely
disabled), elderly spouses, and spouses caring for young children are generally
eligible for benefits if a worker retires, becomes disabled, or dies. The elderly
parents of a deceased worker may be entitled to survivorship benefits if they
were financially dependent on the child for at least half their support.
(See SSA publications "Understanding
the Benefits" and "Disability
Benefits".) |
|
|
How Are Benefit Levels Determined? |
Retirement benefits are based on average earnings during a thirty-five year
career. Higher lifetime earnings result in higher benefits up to an inflation-adjusted
cap. The full benefit currently is payable at age sixty-five and a half (scheduled
to rise gradually to sixty-seven in 2022); workers who retire at age sixty-two
get a reduced benefit based on the likelihood of their collecting benefits over
a longer term. Workers who postpone retirement beyond age sixty-five and a half,
up to age seventy, get more than the full benefit. Survivorship and disability
benefits are also determined by a worker’s average earnings.
Some recipients of retirement and survivorship benefits who continue to work
will have their benefits reduced if they earn above a certain threshold. In
2005, beneficiaries under age sixty-five and a half will lose one dollar of
benefits for every two dollars of earnings above $12,000. The benefits of individuals
aged sixty-five and a half and older are not subject to any earnings test. (See
SSA, "How Work Affects Your
Benefits")
All benefits are adjusted annually to keep pace with inflation, as measured by
the Consumer Price Index (CPI). This means that during periods of high inflation,
such as the 1970s, inflation-adjusted benefits protect Social Security recipients
from having the real benefits of their Social Security check eaten away by a higher
cost of living. Most private pensions do not make similar adjustments for inflation.
(See SSA, 2003 Annual Statistical Supplement, Table
2A.18)
Source: “Fast
Facts and Figures about Social Security,” Social Security Administration,
June 2003, p. 16. |
|
|
Social Security Reduces Elderly Poverty |
In 2003, the benefits paid by Social Security exceeded
$470 billion. These benefits, in combination with Medicare health insurance,
have dramatically reduced poverty for the aged in America. In 1959, the U.S.
Census Bureau estimated that more than 35 percent of elderly Americans were
poor. During the 1960s, elderly Americans experienced twice the poverty rate
of all other Americans. By 2003, in large part because of changes in the Social
Security and Medicare systems, the poverty rate among senior citizens was 10.2
percent. This is slightly lower than the rate for other adults.
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Income,
Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2003, Current
Population Reports, August 2004, Table B–2, p. 46.
Providing workers with pensions is not compulsory for employers in the United
States. In 2001, fewer than 44 percent of all workers were enrolled in private
pension plans. (See the Statistical
Abstract of the United States, 2003, p. 426.)
Source: Fast
Facts and Figures about Social Security, Social Security Administration,
p. 8.
Social Security provided 65 percent of the elderly in America with benefits
that represented at least half their total income. Without Social Security,
approximately 40 percent of the elderly in America would have fallen below the
poverty line in 1999. A significant portion of the elderly need Social Security
to survive: in 2003, 34 percent of elderly recipients relied on Social Security
for at least 90 percent of their total income; for 21 percent of recipients,
Social Security was their only source of income.
Source: Social Security: Performance
and Accountability Report for Fiscal Year 2004, p. 9.
Although women retirees usually receive smaller monthly checks from Social Security
than do men, they typically have a greater need for Social Security. Of unmarried
women age sixty-five and older, for example, 42 percent rely on their Social Security
check for at least 90 percent of their income. (See SSA, Income
of the Population 55 or Older, p. 114) Women tend to be more reliant on their
Social Security checks for numerous reasons:
- Women tend to earn less than men for work outside of the home. Women are
more likely to have interrupted work histories, and the monetary value of
women’s work in raising children is not directly calculated in benefits.
Thus, women often end up with lower retirement benefits than their male counterparts.
The average monthly benefit for a retired woman in 2002 was
$740, compared to $983 for a man.
- Only 18 percent of elderly women receive a private pension, compared with
31 percent of older men. In 2000, the median private pension or annuity income
for women sixty-five or older was about $4,164 annually, compared to $7,768
for men. (See SSA, Income
of the Population 55 or Older, p. 22-23, 89)
- More women than men outlive their spouses because women tend to marry older
men and to have longer life expectancies. Most women are widowed and live
alone after age seventy-five, while most men are married and live with their
wives. Indeed, almost 70 percent of those over age eighty-five are women.
(Statistical
Abstract of the United States, 2003, p. 13)
- Elderly women living alone are more likely to be poor than their male counterparts.
Of the almost 2 million elderly poor living alone in 2003, more
than 1.6 million were women.
(Adapted from the 2005 revised edition of The
Basics Social Security Reform.)
|
|
|
The Nine Guiding Principles of Social Security |
Former SSA Commissioner Robert
Ball discusses the guiding principles that have made Social Security the most
durable, successful and popular government program of the last 70 years. These
nine principles have made Social Security unique in its ability to survive short-sighted
political calculations, balance public opinion, and maintain promises across generations:
In the midst of the Great Depression, the founders of today's Social Security
system took the bold step of establishing a new institution which they expected
to be slow-growing but permanent. They wanted to make a decent retirement attainable
for millions of Americans who would otherwise become dependent on their families
or on public assistance when they grew too old to work or could no longer find
employment. They wanted to protect workers' dependents by providing insurance
to make the death of a breadwinner more financially manageable. They wanted
to put an end to the poorhouse by distributing program income so as to provide
at least a minimally adequate benefit for everyone regularly contributing. And,
foreseeing the inevitability of change—including the eventual need to insure
against other major risks such as disability and illness—they sought to design
an institution based on sustainable principles.
Accordingly, they took the long view. They gave major emphasis to estimating
program income and expenses over a much longer period than was customarily done
in other countries, and this is still true today. The time frame of 75 years
that is now used for Social security estimates is much longer than that used
in almost all other contexts, from foreign social insurance programs to federal
budgeting. The point, then and now, was not to try to pretend that anyone could
really know precisely what would be happening in 75 or 25 years; the point was
that the planners of Social Security in making exceptionally long-term commitments,
wanted always to be looking far enough ahead to anticipate necessary improvements
and make needed changes in ample time to preserve the integrity of the program.
That approach has served well. The legislation of 1935 and 1939 created the
basic design of Social Security, and all major legislation since then can be
seen as building on that design: extending coverage to more and more workers,
improving the level of protection, adding protection against loss of income
from long-term and total disability, providing protection for the elderly and
disabled against the increasingly unmanageable cost of medical care, protecting
against the erosion of income by inflation, and abolishing all statutory differences
in the treatment of men and women.
These and many other accomplishments and adjustments have taken place within
a framework consisting of nine major principles. Social Security is universal;
an earned right; wage related; contributory and self financed; redistributive;
not means tested; wage indexed; inflation protected; and compulsory.
As with any framework, the stability of the entire structure depends on the
contribution made by each part, so it is useful to review these principles and
see how they work together.
1. Universal: Social Security coverage has been gradually extended
over the years to the point where 96 out of 100 jobs in paid employment are
now covered, with more than 142 million working Americans making contributions
in 1997 [154 million in 2003]. And the goal of complete universality can be
reached by gradually covering those remaining state and local government positions
that are not now covered.
2. Earned right: Social Security is more than a statutory right;
it is an earned right, with eligibility for benefits and the benefit
rate based on an individual's past earnings. This principle sharply distinguishes
Social Security from welfare and links the program appropriately, to other earned
rights such as wages, fringe benefits, and private pensions.
3. Wage related: Social Security benefits are related to earnings,
thus reinforcing the concept of benefits as an earned rights and recognizing
that there is a relationship between one's standard of living while working
and the benefits level needed to achieve income security in retirement. Under
Social Security, higher-paid earners get higher benefits, but the lower-paid
get more for what they pay in.
4. Contributory and self-financed: The fact that workers pay
ear-marked contributions from their wages into the system also reinforces the
concept of an earned right and gives contributors a moral claim on future benefits
above and beyond statutory obligations. And, unlike many foreign plans, Social
Security is entirely financed by dedicated taxes, principally those deducted
from workers' earnings matched by employers, with the self-employed paying comparable
amounts. The entire cost of benefits plus administrative expenses (which amount
to less than 1 percent of income) is met without support from general government
revenues.
The self-financing approach has several advantages. It helps protect the program
against having to compete against other programs in the annual general federal
budget—which is appropriate, because this is a uniquely long-term program.
It imposes fiscal discipline, because the total earmarked income for Social
Security must be sufficient to cover the entire cost of the program. And it
guards against excessive liberalization: contributors oppose major benefit cuts
because the have a right to benefits and are paying for them, but they also
oppose excessive increases in benefits because they understand that every increase
must be paid for by increased contributions. Thus a semi-automatic balance is
achieved between wanting more protection versus not wanting to pay more for
it.
5. Redistributive: One of Social Security's most important goals
is to pay at least a minimally adequate benefit to workers who are regularly
covered and contributing, regardless of how low-paid they may be. This is accomplished
through a redistributional formula that pays comparatively higher benefits to
lower-paid earners. The formula makes good sense. If the system paid back to
low-wage workers only the benefit that they could be expected to pay for from
their own wages, millions of retirees would end up impoverished and on welfare
even though they had been paying into Social Security throughout their working
lives. This would make the years of contributing to Social Security worse than
pointless, since the earnings paid into Social Security would have reduced the
income available for other needs throughout their working years without providing
in retirement any income greater than what would be available from welfare.
The redistributional formula solves this dilemma.
6. Not means tested: In contrast to welfare, eligibility for
Social Security is not determined by the beneficiary's current income and assets,
nor is the amount of the benefit. This is a key principle. It is the absence
of a means test that makes it possible for people to add to their savings and
to establish private pension plans, secure in the knowledge that they will not
then be penalized by having their Social Security benefits cut back as a result
of having arranged for additional retirement income. The absence of a means
test makes it possible for Social Security to provide a stable role in anchoring
a multi-tier retirement system in which private pensions and personal savings
can be built on top of Social Security's basic, defined protection.
7. Wage indexed: Social Security is portable, following the worker
from job to job, and the protection provided before retirement increases as
wages rise in general. Benefits at the time of initial receipt are brought up
to date with current wage levels, reflecting improvements in productivity and
thus in the general standard of living. Without this principle, Social Security
would soon provide benefits that did not reflect previously attained living
standards.
8. Inflation protected: Once they begin, Social Security benefits
are protected against inflation by periodic cost-of living adjustments (COLAs)
linked to the Consumer Price Index. Inflation protection is one of Social Security's
greatest strengths, and one that distinguishes it from other (except federal)
retirement plans. No private pension plan provides guaranteed protection against
inflation, and inflation protection under state and local plans, where it exists
at all, is capped. Without COLAs, the real value of Social Security benefits
would steadily erode over time, as is the case with unadjusted private pension
benefits. Although a provision for automatic adjustment was not part of the
original legislation, the importance of protecting benefits against inflation
was recognized, and over the years the system was financed to allow for periodic
adjustments to bring benefits up to date. But this updating was done only after
a lag. Provision for automatic adjustment was added in 1972.
9. Compulsory: Social Security compels all of us to contribute
to our own future security. A voluntary system simply wouldn't work. Some of
us would save scrupulously, some would save sporadically, and some would postpone
the day of reckoning forever, leaving the community as a whole to pay through
a much less desirable safety-net system. With a compulsory program, the problem
of adverse selection—individuals deciding when and to what extent they
want to participate, depending on whether their individual circumstances seem
favorable—is avoided (as is the problem of obtaining adequate funding for
a large safety-net program serving a constituency with limited political influence).
* * *
In the middle of the Depression it took courage to enact a system based on
these principles. The depression was a time of enormous and immediate needs,
but Social Security was designed to be a slow-growing tree, one that could not
provide much shelter in the near term. The point, however, was that, once grown,
it would be strong enough to weather bad times as well as good.
A contributory retirement system takes a long time to develop, since by definition
those who are already retired are not eligible for benefits. Fifteen years after
the program was set up, only 16 percent of the elderly were receiving benefits,
and it was not until the 1950s that politicians began to see much advantage
in championing Social Security improvements. And it was only in the 1960s, three
decades after enactment, that Social Security began having a major impact, paying
benefits that were high enough and universal enough to significantly reduce
poverty among the elderly, the disabled, and the survivors of beneficiaries.
After the amendments of 1972 further increased benefits substantially and provided
for automatic inflation protection, Social Security fully assumed the role planned
for it as the all-important base of a multi-tier retirement system in which
private pensions and individual savings are added to Social Security's defined
protection.
The importance of that role would be difficult to exaggerate. Today Social
Security is the only organized retirement plan—the only assured source
of retirement income—for fully half of the total workforce. And it is the
base upon which all who are able to do so can build the supplementary protection
of pensions and individual savings.
Social Security continues to be the most popular and successful program in
America's history because its guiding principles enable it to work exactly as
intended: as America's family protection plan.
—From Straight
Talk about Social Security, by Robert Ball with Thomas N. Bethell (Century
Foundation, 1998)
|
|
|
Fast Facts |
Links to assorted fact sheets and short briefs on various aspects of the Social Security program. See also The Century Foundation's 2005 edition of The Basics: Social Security Reform. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Official Resources |
Important releases and information resources from the Social Security Administration, Congressional Budget Office and other government agencies regarding the program's operations, finances, and future. |
|
|
|
|
2005 OASDI Trustees Report
|
|
Social Security Administration,
3/23/2005
|
|
The annual report of the trustees of Social Security finds little changed in the program's financial outlook since the 2004 report.
|
Link to Report
|
 |
|
|
|
|
2004 SSI Annual Report
|
|
Social Security Administration,
6/3/2004
|
|
The Annual Report of the Supplemental Security Income Program issued in May 2004 describes the financial status of the program.
|
Link to Report
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 Green Book
|
|
United States House of Representatives,
4/1/2004
|
|
Explanation and analysis regarding Social Security in the House Ways and Means Committee's annual report.
|
Link to Contents
|
 |
|
|
2004 OASDI Trustees Report
|
|
Social Security Administration,
3/24/2004
|
|
Each year, the trustees of Social Security release a report on the system's finances and operations, along with actuarial estimates of the program's future.
|
Link to Report
|
 |
|
|
|
|