It was only in my lifetime, that Social Security became taxable. It was never meant to be taxed. It was money, you put aside, for the government to hold for you, in a separate untouchable (by anyone) account, until you retire. In the 1960’s, Congress looked at the SS account and decided to make it their piggy bank. They “incorporated “ the SS account into the general treasury and that is where the problem started. To keep going forward, in later years, they taxed our money. How about taking Congress representatives and their bloated staffs salaries to make up the difference?
I don't believe the money you paid into SS was put into an account for your retirement. That money that you paid was immediately given out to current SS recipients. When SS was started, the average lifespan was around 60 years, so most people died before collecting. There were also many more people paying into SS than taking money out of SS.
First of all, SS is a trust fund and can only be used to pay benefits and administration costs. I believe, but I could be wrong, the trust is not being touched at this time as the incoming withholding are covering the monthly benefit payments, The issue is we are approaching a time when the incoming will not be enough so the trust fund levels will begin to decrease. Its simple economics, Also, keep in mind this is a benefit that includes not only retirement money for you the contributor, but for your surviving spouse and potentially ex-spouse(s), people with disabilities who are unable to work, and children who lost a parent(s). Also be aware that only Congress has the power to addressing funding and distribution with laws. The Executive branch can issue order on how process rules like the recent order to improve our mobile access to SS for claims and payment requests. Additionally, the trust fund is not part of the government's general "budget" so it is not possible to take from the trust fund without a law.
@@Norm475 The average lifespan of a 20 year old then was very similar then to today. The shorter average lifespan you and others mention includes the much higher infant mortality, but did not significantly affect people who retired and were able to claim social security.
No, it was not money "you put aside". It was the Fed Gov't who took it out of your paycheck and your employer's earnings. The money I put aside via 401K's and IRA's and Brokerage accounts has done very well.
The money in the SS trust fund is being paid back by the govt. with interest. The arguments about SS changing since its creations are silly. Yes SS has changed over the last 85+ years. I would hope so.
I get a FERS pension (Federal Civil Service), Military pension, and social security. 85% of my social security was taxable and my social security taxes equaled $4000.00. That is so unfair that I was smart, worked hard all my life, and was penalized. The federal government is so corrupt and I am sick of it.
36trillion debt against 1.2trillion collected in federal tax last year…. Question is… what f they czz as my even cover a fraction of the interested owed on the debt, why make us pay ? Scariest part is not more people are furious about it.. Ron Paul reminded us of this historical error repeated 5x in ver before America
We have come to accept INCOMPETENCE from our self serving politicians. They are SO OUT OF TOUCH with the average American experience and in many cases, or so it seems to me, with reality.
@@sonnytimpkins9699500k income is high. Wealth is measured in net worth. You could make 500k per year and spend it all, therefore you would have no net worth. Or you could earn 100k per year, which is a mid level income, and save 15% per year for 30 years in an equities portfolio throwing off 10% growth per year and be a multi millionaire.
Stop saying that 250K is the middle class. It is not. That is upper-class income. In 2021, the U.S. Census Bureau reported that the median U.S. household income was $65,000, so middle income would be between $43,350 and $130,000. In 2023, the Pew Research Center reported that middle class includes Americans making between $38,133 and $114,400.
Correct. And about the "Taxman" cutting and slashing, imagine a world where Reagan, Bush in his 2 tax cut bills and Trump, instead of giving 85 percent or more to corporations and the 1 percent, had given 50 percent of those tax breaks to the other 99 percent! I know, crazy talk, but instead having those making $100k and under, ZERO Tax's! Everyone, even those making $500k would pay no tax on that first $100k. Then progressively raise rates all the way up. No deductions, no write-offs. 85 percent of us would pay nothing, and the Rich who pay nothing now, or 15 percent effective tax rates on investment income, would actually have to pay. As the 85-90 percentile put most of all our income back into the economy, there would be billions more going into the economy, instead of being warehoused by the Rich, paying obscene bonuses and stock buybacks that do nothing for the economy as a whole. I know, but it's a dream.
@@miket1181 🤔It doesn’t matter at all where you live… The income is still the same amount… Over $250,000 is more than most people in this country make so why shouldn’t those people taking in large salaries paid into the system which will keep it working? They still have all the tax write offs which people in lower income brackets cannot take advantage of. It’s called progressive taxation ~ wealthier people pay a bit more into the system because they will not suffer for it. So they don’t get an extra Mercedes? Sad. Thoughts and prayers.
@@divinewon73 with inflation over time everybody will be paying the extra tax, just like Social security taxed over time now every one pays tax on their SS income. Don’t you feel taxed for everything you do? Name ten things you are not taxed on these days .
the money is not "taken out of the economy". It is given back to the people who paid in in the first place. The money would then go directly back in the economy buying goods and services stimulating the economy.
Yes, and it's going to people that are going to spend most all of it in the short term, which is the ideal situation and a heck of a lot better than giving it to someone that's wealthy and already spending all they care to spend who'll just put it in the brokerage account.
Removing the cap IS absolutely the right way to ensure SS stays solvent. The wealthy can and should continue to pay taxes for SS. The amount will not affect their lifestyle at all. The super rich need to pay their fare share.
How much do the rich pay of the total federal income tax - north of 80%. Since they only make up 1% that would appear to confirm they pay more than their fair share. You want to fix things here are a few suggestions: 1. Flat tax - zero exceptions 2. Congress have to live by exactly the same rules as us. 3. Balanced budget. 4. No politician can work for any company as a Consultant that they creates a bill, sponsored or voted for a bill benefiting such a company. 5. No politician can work for a lobbying firm for at least 5 years after retirement from public office. There’s a few starters.
@@Dottydawes That's the go to response always. When the 1 percent own half the wealth, something like 45 Trillion in assets, they should be paying ALL the tax! The issue is percentages. Or "Effective tax rates. My AGI for the last several years has been around $85k, and my effective tax rate is always right at 20 percent. When Elon Musk can sell 11 billion worth of stock options, yet only pay 15 percent, that's the problem. Shouldn't he pay at least what I pay in percentage? Just saying all the"Tax Cuts" doled out by Bush and Trump are designed to put mechanisms in place that can only be utilized when you reach a certain level of income. That is inherently unfair, regardless of"Percentage" of the total Tax's paid. If all things were equal, the Rich WOULD be paying far more.
Don’t feel bad. I’m paying tax on the sale of a business that was taken from me through eminent domain. First they demand I sell it to them for the price they decide. Then I pay them tax back.
What the heck, that’s not fair to say the least. What was the business? My parents are in a similar situation. They are partners in a golf course, the village has been talking about buying it. If they do buy it, it won’t be at a fair price, I am not sure what they are calling it but it sounds similar to what they did to you.
Was the eminent domain state or federal? Since we are talking about taxes, what was the marginal capital gain rate on your sale? The top rate is 20%. Pretty sweet.
@@johnnyretires It was state and I understand your thinking it was sweet, except they only pay for the buildings and land, not the business, itself. And the price is based on their calculations. So then you hire an attorney who gets a 30% cut. What a deal. And here’s the kicker. It was a thousand yards from the new highway, so they ended up not using the property, except to move the power poles back.
This is not a painful tax even though it is noticeable. This article is a complaint that people who have high income will be paying into Social Security which is what the article is about without him saying it in simple terms. People making large salaries will start paying into Social Security from that salary at the same rate they were in income is below $168,000. That means that someone who takes in $100 million will still pay into it and the program will be totally solvent. People making more than $250,000 per year are getting off without paying into the system which should be part of the plan. People making above $250,000 should continue contributing… WHY Should there be 100% relief from this social obligation along with all their write offs that most people cannot take advantage of? This balances the picture very well and they cannot get away from paying the tax. Very fair. It’s called progressive taxation. This man doesn’t talk about tax write offs and the fact that those write offs are subsidized by people paying taxes. That’s welfare for the wealthy and should not exist in this country!
EVERYONE who receives social security or is working and paying into Social Security MUST write to their Senator and Representative immediately to pass this Bill and ensure it is signed in the end. No one 65 years old and older should be taxed on their Social Security at ALL. With inflation, the elders are skipping prescriptions, paying more for rent, paying more for Medicare, paying more for food. How do they expect someone who makes $25,000/year on Social security to live. Many elderly 75 year olds are working in Walmart to pay for prescriptions and food. Some are even eating once a day! Many are homeless as rent is too high. Why don't they force the 33% of Generational Welfare under 25 year old with six kids to GO TO WORK AND CONTRIBUTE INTO SOCIAL SECURITY! Just ridiculous and an abuse on the elderly. With inflation, taxes, HOAs, insurance, Real Estate tax increases, the wage cap for Social Security tax should be raised to $300,000.
People who only have income from Social Security do not pay federal taxes on that income due to exemptions and the standard deduction. Retired people who owe federal income taxes only owe those taxes because of their other income, like pensions and retirement savings disbursements.
@@stmurphyclan Exactly. Those who have worked for 30 years and get small Social Security with their small Pension should not be taxed. They should not be penalized for having worked instead of syphoning off of the government.
Most "Retired" people are not Homeless, as you asset. Most own their own homes, or have accumulated assets thru their lifetime outside of SS only. Are there people that DO only get SS? Yes there are, millions of them. But the other 75-80 percent, SS is just part of retirement income. You sound like 99 percent of retired people live in an apartment, pay rent, and only have SS. You are incorrect. Way incorrect.
@@bigjohnson7415 How many people live exclusively on Social Security? About 40% of older Americans may be relying exclusively on Social Security for income, according to recent research. That’s a lot of people trying to get by on less than $2000 monthly. That is incredibly low income to people taking in over $250,000 per year. Says with the higher income can easily afford another 6.2% and will feel nothing. There should never have been a cap on Social Security deductions ~ nobody would be talking about insolvency. Don’t forget, a huge number of veterans and disabled people also depend on Social Security who cannot work.
One guy on UA-cam said if they simply changed the index they use to set COLAs that funding social security would be resolved. Personally, I’d like to see the SS taxation brackets updated.
Tax Cuts for the Rich, farm subsidies that pay corporate farms NOT to plant food, use of corporate jets for private travel, Yachts- yes Virginia, there was a special carve out for Yacht owners in the 2017 tax Cuts! I can go on.
It's definitely reasonable to remove the FICA cap. Billionaires & the biggest corporations have been getting off easy with the cap. Now they will also have to continue contributing to fund SS & Medicare. That alone will keep it solvent. Corporations should think of it as a pension plan for workers in America who keep their businesses open, profitable and billionaires wealthy.
1. And what is your solution for solving the Social Security problem - I didn't hear any. If you're going to criticize, offer a solution so we can compare. The You Make It, You Keep It bill is by far the best option I have seen for extending the solvency of Social Security. 2. Only 7 % of US households make above $250,000 so classifying them as middle class is absurd. 3. The money saved on taxes by Social Security recipients is far more likely to be returned to the economy than if the money is retained by tax payers making over $250,000.
I am a life long democrat but I can’t forget when Mr Clinton was president he took $300.000.00 million from the security trust fund to balance the budget. At the time I thought he was foolish because I knew my generation was huge, the boomers, and the government should not be dipping into it. Bush #2 put the fund into the expense account.
Reagan had no Constitutional authority to sign the bill that imposed taxes on SS payments in the first place. It's suppose to be a pension plan not a welfare give away. Read the 5th amendment. It says that the government has no authority to take private property away from people for a public purpose without just compensation. What was the just compensation the people who got SS pensions received? Almost nothing. No sooner was the money paid in then it was paid out. Or it was lent out to other bureaucracies of the Federal government. That is not Just compensation!
Better for who ?? Some individuals maybe but be aware SS provides a lot of benefits for those in need such as surviving spouses (and ex-spouses, people disabled and unable to work, and children who lost a parent or parents. The negative impact to society and this back on to us will out weight the minor tax concerns. Keep in the 2 changes being discussed are to raise the income level for the with-holdings. Currently SS with-holding stop around $168k, so this only impacts people who earn more then this amount. The other change is discussing changing how much of the actual monthly paid benefit will be taxed. Currently it on taxes up to 85%, so 15% is not taxed at all. Remember, the with-holdings were taken out pre-tax from your wages, so you were never taxed for it and it lowered your tax bracket.
Don't push against double taxation of social security benefits. This is a total rip off of all of our seniors that are getting SS benefits. Just change the addition revenue portion of the bill by raising the part of our wages that are taxable by SS to $180,000 or $200,000 and it would more than make up the difference of this small amount of revenue the government makes by taxing SS benefits.
No cap. I agree 100%. If a CEO gets a salary and stock options those stock options should be taxed for social security too, either when they get the options or when they are exercised.
I'm not a college Educated economist, but you say the economy will suffer because the higher end will be taxed at a higher rate and money will exit the economy, but if You're giving a tax break at the lower end, wouldn't funds find their way back into the economy at that point? You seemed to ignore that part.
This country is in so much debt. What ever happened to a balanced budget? If we all ran a budget like the federal government, we would all be bankrupt. How can the government find money for fighting foreign wars, but not find money for social security? The government got us into this mess. Let them restore social security to the sound financial program it used to be. They created the mess. They should fix it!
I favor this bill. Got a better idea for saving SS? It does take money out of the economy. Most seniors will spend the savings they get. If the middle class is the target, I don't get how those making over $250,000 are still in the middle class. Aren't they still in the top 5%?
Congress passed and President Reagan signed into law the 1983 Amendments. Under the '83 Amendments, up to one-half of the value of the Social Security benefit was made potentially taxable income. What I can't understand why retirees keep voting for GOP.
How many people live exclusively on Social Security? About 40% of older Americans may be relying exclusively on Social Security for income, according to recent research. That’s a huge number of people trying to get by on less than $2000 monthly. Let’s ask the people taking in an income of $250,000 or more per year if they would like to try living that way… They wouldn’t ~ I am one of the lower income people that could use more money to compete with the corporate greed that is creating this artificial inflation.
That’s what all these supremely over paid CEOs do… Instead of big bonuses, they get stock options, so they only pay a small percentage compared to average working Americans. It’s corrupt and this tax corrects that impact. Mandatory without deductions or write offs. It’s a wonderful idea.
SS should be abolished. A poor young person (which the most of young people are) should be financing retirees who had 40 years to prepare for their retirement! Why should a young person with tens of thousands in student loan and total inability to afford a shelter should pay for the retirement of well off retirees?? Instead of spending their money through out their life people should prepare themselves for retirement by not coercing others into paying for it.
From what I understand the 250k is not indexed - so over time the non-taxed doughnut whole will go away. So they are making the same type of issue that was made in 1983/84, right? Index the 250k so there will always be a range not taxed.
Toby, while the tax comes out of the economy, the reduced tax for the Social Security beneficiaries goes into the economy. It will be close to a wash with much of the benefit skewed towards the middle class.
The fact that the "provisional" income requirement for taxing Social Security has not been increased for over 40 damn years is ridiculous. $25,000 might have been a decent amount of money 40 years ago, but is nothing today.
That was intentional, eventually 85% of SS will be taxable income. Note the 15% not taxed is a good match for the 12.4% paid into the system by you and your employers, so it's sort of like the basis in an IRA.
@@Satjr35031 Yeah or you could have a Single person with a small pension and a 401K paying 22% tax bracket every year, plus getting hammered with RMD's once they hit 70... you also did not consider the mandatory withdrawals that couple will be hit with in 5 years. Having 85% of your already taxed SS benefit taxed a second time as ordinary income is ridiculous.
I think every person should pay on every dollar they make. Why should a person making 168k pay the full 6.2% but a person making 336k only pays in effect 3.1% Keep a cap on the employer contribution to help reduce their overall cost provided the employer offers a retirement plan
@@budatkins5917 Alan Greenspan would tell you didn’t pay paid enough into SS. If you need it, I’m sorry that really sucks. I’m just advocating for less burden on all of us. Less misery. What if SS is a horribly inefficient “safety net” and we are obfuscating better methods because change bad?
Yes, Toby. People making larger incomes will contribute like they should have from the beginning. Toby phrases it improperly as if it is a hardship on somebody when it actually corrects the situation and puts the Social Security fund back into solvency. In case you didn’t notice, the changes were made in 1983 under the Ronald Reagan anti-American agenda. Tax breaks for the wealthy and everybody else can pays for it. Hell no! 40+ years of the phony trickle down economics is enough and Americans are sick of it. We need to thank the party who suggested it and I am confident it is the Democrats. Thank you Joe Biden and Democrats for looking out for average Americans. 🩵💙VOTE BLUE💙🩵
I take care of my parents who are on ssi retired and get 4600 a month total. I work for a bank with 5 kids and take home 3k a month. They order Amazon all day use all my toiletries and say they have no money. I watch your show to do better for my kids. Trying to learn what to do since I know what not to do.
Open an Health Saving Account if you are eligible. It is tax deductible today and will earn tax free and can be withdrawn tax free. You can always use it during retirement to pay for Medicare Premiums and Long-term Care Insurance. Also if the kids are old enough to work (even baby sitting, grass cutting, etc) you can open a ROTH for them to contribute. Fidelity has a child customer ROTH. Lots of video on UA-cam for more info.
They need to eliminate the SS cap. or at least reduce for those paying over $500K to say a graduated number. Problem is, many business owners in large government contracts make donations back to their political cronies so that the politicians can pay to be re-elected. How about term limits for Congress and a 10 moratorium on politicians working for as lobbyist. Also, eliminate politicians from being able to trade on insider information. In other words, put their assets in a the SPY or QQQ while they are in Congress. Most stocks (80%) do not do better than the SPY.
The whole thing's idiotic. Don't tax the benefits, just make them tax-free and 10% lower. Take the cap off ss taxable income. There. Solvency problem solved. Run the numbers yourself if you don't believe me.
And the House (Speaker was Tip O'Neill, a Democrat) and the Senate. The patch worked for forty years, that's forever in political terms. They certainly didn't foresee the crashing birthdate.
Non-labor income is the best way to avoid paying into this ponzi scheme. For those that own real estate properties or passive income from stocks and bonds.
Taxes pay for Roads, Police, Fire etc... So millions of people shouldn't have to pay for services they use everyday? That doesn't seem fair for all those still working paying taxes for everyone else
sure there is , they take fed tax out of my ck each month. Maybe you should call the government and TELL THEM there is no fed tax on SS. I would appreciate it.
@@Satjr35031If you are single, on SS, and that is your ONLY income, you are mostly right. But if you have other income, dividends, rental income, interest from savings accounts, 401k disbursement, you are incorrect. Depending on how much you have coming in, you could be taxed on up to 85 percent of your SS income when combined with other incomes.
For most people SS is just part of retirement income, but I will grant you there are millions of poor people who SS IS their only income, who saved nothing at all their entire working life. That's sad, but life choices have a lot to do with that.
The joke is, ""less then 20% of ssi persons receive over the 25 k max in a years checks""., so who was really paying tax. It's a con statement. People with other incomes and ssi combined. They should pay tax of above. Now workers and employers are on the hook AND BIG EARNERS
Keep in mind it's not just SSI plus wages but retirement account withdrawals count towards the $25K/$34K combined income also. Unless living off SSI only, likely have these as well.
Oh noooooooo!!! We can’t POSSIBLY tax the baby boomers! Not while they earned money, not while they just use it. Never! As a Xennial tax lawyer myself, I want to know what happened to those medical death panels we were promised.
Well, I'd rather a bill like this not get any air time whatsoever. I'd rather not even know about it as It will never see the light of day EVER... If SS was on a sound footing maybe but since Social Security is soon to be insolvent I'm more than certain it won't pass through all the hurdles with the biggest being the Republican controlled Senate (nope) then a signature from the President (maybe). Not Gonna Happen PERIOD .... BOOM ... GONE 😹
I receive social security retirement benefits and would love it if they were not taxable, but I think this proposal is unfair. The proposal increases taxes on high earners without a corresponding increase in benefits. This boils down to an act of welfare. SS is not supposed to be a welfare program. You are supposed to get a higher retirement benefit if you pay more into the system. The payout system is already skewed toward the benefit of low earners.
500 k seems rich.....until you sell your parents assets after they pass away. Their 3 bedroom ranch 20 miles out of Boston, Massachusetts will sell for 1 million dollars. P.S. KY jelly comes in 55 gallon drums and may be tax deductable.😮
In case you aren't aware, the estate tax doesn't kick in until $15 MILLION dollars! And they're talking $500k ANNUAL income, not net worth. Do you know how many people earn $500k a year? Less than 1 percent.
Want answers to your questions about this video? Schedule a complimentary consultation with our experts today! aba.link/6z1
It was only in my lifetime, that Social Security became taxable. It was never meant to be taxed. It was money, you put aside, for the government to hold for you, in a separate untouchable (by anyone) account, until you retire. In the 1960’s, Congress looked at the SS account and decided to make it their piggy bank. They “incorporated “ the SS account into the general treasury and that is where the problem started. To keep going forward, in later years, they taxed our money.
How about taking Congress representatives and their bloated staffs salaries to make up the difference?
I don't believe the money you paid into SS was put into an account for your retirement. That money that you paid was immediately given out to current SS recipients. When SS was started, the average lifespan was around 60 years, so most people died before collecting. There were also many more people paying into SS than taking money out of SS.
First of all, SS is a trust fund and can only be used to pay benefits and administration costs. I believe, but I could be wrong, the trust is not being touched at this time as the incoming withholding are covering the monthly benefit payments, The issue is we are approaching a time when the incoming will not be enough so the trust fund levels will begin to decrease. Its simple economics, Also, keep in mind this is a benefit that includes not only retirement money for you the contributor, but for your surviving spouse and potentially ex-spouse(s), people with disabilities who are unable to work, and children who lost a parent(s). Also be aware that only Congress has the power to addressing funding and distribution with laws. The Executive branch can issue order on how process rules like the recent order to improve our mobile access to SS for claims and payment requests. Additionally, the trust fund is not part of the government's general "budget" so it is not possible to take from the trust fund without a law.
@@Norm475 The average lifespan of a 20 year old then was very similar then to today. The shorter average lifespan you and others mention includes the much higher infant mortality, but did not significantly affect people who retired and were able to claim social security.
No, it was not money "you put aside". It was the Fed Gov't who took it out of your paycheck and your employer's earnings. The money I put aside via 401K's and IRA's and Brokerage accounts has done very well.
The money in the SS trust fund is being paid back by the govt. with interest.
The arguments about SS changing since its creations are silly. Yes SS has changed over the last 85+ years. I would hope so.
I get a FERS pension (Federal Civil Service), Military pension, and social security. 85% of my social security was taxable and my social security taxes equaled $4000.00. That is so unfair that I was smart, worked hard all my life, and was penalized. The federal government is so corrupt and I am sick of it.
We are at a breaking point
36trillion debt against 1.2trillion collected in federal tax last year….
Question is… what f they czz as my even cover a fraction of the interested owed on the debt, why make us pay ?
Scariest part is not more people are furious about it.. Ron Paul reminded us of this historical error repeated 5x in ver before America
And as a reference, taxes are historically low. Fact.
So someone is not paying their share.
We have come to accept INCOMPETENCE from our self serving politicians. They are SO OUT OF TOUCH with the average American experience and in many cases, or so it seems to me, with reality.
@@johnnyretires I am definitely paying more than my fair share so you better not be referring to me
My obsevations over the past 68 years of my life have lead me to one conclusion: When it comes to legislation that benefits me, it never passes.
Tax university endowments and religious institutions. Done.
Most people would consider someone making $500K rich, not Middle Class
500k is not rich!!
@@sonnytimpkins9699 It's not, maybe learn how to budget at 500K/year so you're not eating rice and beans.
@@sonnytimpkins9699 It’s richer than 95% of the country
@@sonnytimpkins9699500k income is high. Wealth is measured in net worth. You could make 500k per year and spend it all, therefore you would have no net worth. Or you could earn 100k per year, which is a mid level income, and save 15% per year for 30 years in an equities portfolio throwing off 10% growth per year and be a multi millionaire.
$500k is 1 percentile income!
Stop saying that 250K is the middle class. It is not. That is upper-class income. In 2021, the U.S. Census Bureau reported that the median U.S. household income was $65,000, so middle income would be between $43,350 and $130,000. In 2023, the Pew Research Center reported that middle class includes Americans making between $38,133 and $114,400.
Depends where you live, a family would be scraping by after the taxman cuts and slashes.
Correct. And about the "Taxman" cutting and slashing, imagine a world where Reagan, Bush in his 2 tax cut bills and Trump, instead of giving 85 percent or more to corporations and the 1 percent, had given 50 percent of those tax breaks to the other 99 percent! I know, crazy talk, but instead having those making $100k and under, ZERO Tax's! Everyone, even those making $500k would pay no tax on that first $100k. Then progressively raise rates all the way up. No deductions, no write-offs. 85 percent of us would pay nothing, and the Rich who pay nothing now, or 15 percent effective tax rates on investment income, would actually have to pay. As the 85-90 percentile put most of all our income back into the economy, there would be billions more going into the economy, instead of being warehoused by the Rich, paying obscene bonuses and stock buybacks that do nothing for the economy as a whole. I know, but it's a dream.
@@miket1181 🤔It doesn’t matter at all where you live… The income is still the same amount… Over $250,000 is more than most people in this country make so why shouldn’t those people taking in large salaries paid into the system which will keep it working?
They still have all the tax write offs which people in lower income brackets cannot take advantage of. It’s called progressive taxation ~ wealthier people pay a bit more into the system because they will not suffer for it. So they don’t get an extra Mercedes? Sad. Thoughts and prayers.
@@divinewon73 with inflation over time everybody will be paying the extra tax, just like Social security taxed over time now every one pays tax on their SS income. Don’t you feel taxed for everything you do? Name ten things you are not taxed on these days .
The median household income is around $70K.
the money is not "taken out of the economy". It is given back to the people who paid in in the first place. The money would then go directly back in the economy buying goods and services stimulating the economy.
Yes, and it's going to people that are going to spend most all of it in the short term, which is the ideal situation and a heck of a lot better than giving it to someone that's wealthy and already spending all they care to spend who'll just put it in the brokerage account.
As those who vote on these bills make more than the $250,000, it will never fly.
As alway's there will be a second vote after this passes (if it does) and that will be for Congress to exclude themselves.
We already paid taxes on them...just like Roth IRAs.
SS with-holdings from your wages are pre-tax so more like your 401k as opposed to ROTH.
Removing the cap IS absolutely the right way to ensure SS stays solvent. The wealthy can and should continue to pay taxes for SS. The amount will not affect their lifestyle at all. The super rich need to pay their fare share.
Finally, some sensible talk! 👍👍👍
How much do the rich pay of the total federal income tax - north of 80%. Since they only make up 1% that would appear to confirm they pay more than their fair share.
You want to fix things here are a few suggestions:
1. Flat tax - zero exceptions
2. Congress have to live by exactly the same rules as us.
3. Balanced budget.
4. No politician can work for any company as a Consultant that they creates a bill, sponsored or voted for a bill benefiting such a company.
5. No politician can work for a lobbying firm for at least 5 years after retirement from public office.
There’s a few starters.
@@Dottydawes That's the go to response always. When the 1 percent own half the wealth, something like 45 Trillion in assets, they should be paying ALL the tax! The issue is percentages. Or "Effective tax rates. My AGI for the last several years has been around $85k, and my effective tax rate is always right at 20 percent. When Elon Musk can sell 11 billion worth of stock options, yet only pay 15 percent, that's the problem. Shouldn't he pay at least what I pay in percentage? Just saying all the"Tax Cuts" doled out by Bush and Trump are designed to put mechanisms in place that can only be utilized when you reach a certain level of income. That is inherently unfair, regardless of"Percentage" of the total Tax's paid. If all things were equal, the Rich WOULD be paying far more.
@@Dottydawes 80%???? The highest tax bracket is currently 37%
The rich need to pay same as everyone else. No more loopholes for anyone.
The extra employment tax is NOT coming out of the economy. Those dollars are simply spent by SS recipients.
I'd support that legislation. Also, they should remove the cap on social security tax
Don’t feel bad. I’m paying tax on the sale of a business that was taken from me through eminent domain. First they demand I sell it to them for the price they decide. Then I pay them tax back.
What the heck, that’s not fair to say the least. What was the business? My parents are in a similar situation. They are partners in a golf course, the village has been talking about buying it. If they do buy it, it won’t be at a fair price, I am not sure what they are calling it but it sounds similar to what they did to you.
@@mxtv1258it’s called robbery
Was the eminent domain state or federal? Since we are talking about taxes, what was the marginal capital gain rate on your sale? The top rate is 20%. Pretty sweet.
@@johnnyretires It was state and I understand your thinking it was sweet, except they only pay for the buildings and land, not the business, itself. And the price is based on their calculations. So then you hire an attorney who gets a 30% cut. What a deal. And here’s the kicker. It was a thousand yards from the new highway, so they ended up not using the property, except to move the power poles back.
@@rustynail7866 well that sucks. The state forces property sale for eminent domain and then doesn’t use it
God forbid cut the wasteful pentagon budget.
Or the Trillions in corporate tax Cuts that went to share buybacks!
Navigating social security can feel like traversing a complex maze, doesn't it? It's essential to have a guide.
Help me understand why there's a cap on ss anyways? Why does it stop after you make do much... so the rich don't say ss after $ 168,000?
I agree that there shouldn't be a $168,000 cap. I think this bill makes a lot of sense, and I hope it passes.
Its capped at that because the BENEFIT formula is capped. Since benefits exceeds the contributions it wouldn't make sense if it goes up.
They need to prevent the super rich from using the benefit. They already get all kind of tax breaks that the rest of us don’t get.
The rich do not need much SS. They can invest in private plans and don't make their employers lose more money.
This is not a painful tax even though it is noticeable. This article is a complaint that people who have high income will be paying into Social Security which is what the article is about without him saying it in simple terms.
People making large salaries will start paying into Social Security from that salary at the same rate they were in income is below $168,000. That means that someone who takes in $100 million will still pay into it and the program will be totally solvent. People making more than $250,000 per year are getting off without paying into the system which should be part of the plan.
People making above $250,000 should continue contributing… WHY Should there be 100% relief from this social obligation along with all their write offs that most people cannot take advantage of? This balances the picture very well and they cannot get away from paying the tax. Very fair. It’s called progressive taxation.
This man doesn’t talk about tax write offs and the fact that those write offs are subsidized by people paying taxes. That’s welfare for the wealthy and should not exist in this country!
From my perspective... If you work, you pay the tax, no cap.
Add to bill that congress can not deduct anymore from the trust fund and the administrative expenses have to be cut by 50%.
EVERYONE who receives social security or is working and paying into Social Security MUST write to their Senator and Representative immediately to pass this Bill and ensure it is signed in the end. No one 65 years old and older should be taxed on their Social Security at ALL. With inflation, the elders are skipping prescriptions, paying more for rent, paying more for Medicare, paying more for food. How do they expect someone who makes $25,000/year on Social security to live. Many elderly 75 year olds are working in Walmart to pay for prescriptions and food. Some are even eating once a day! Many are homeless as rent is too high. Why don't they force the 33% of Generational Welfare under 25 year old with six kids to GO TO WORK AND CONTRIBUTE INTO SOCIAL SECURITY! Just ridiculous and an abuse on the elderly. With inflation, taxes, HOAs, insurance, Real Estate tax increases, the wage cap for Social Security tax should be raised to $300,000.
People who only have income from Social Security do not pay federal taxes on that income due to exemptions and the standard deduction. Retired people who owe federal income taxes only owe those taxes because of their other income, like pensions and retirement savings disbursements.
@@stmurphyclan Exactly. Those who have worked for 30 years and get small Social Security with their small Pension should not be taxed. They should not be penalized for having worked instead of syphoning off of the government.
Most "Retired" people are not Homeless, as you asset. Most own their own homes, or have accumulated assets thru their lifetime outside of SS only. Are there people that DO only get SS? Yes there are, millions of them. But the other 75-80 percent, SS is just part of retirement income. You sound like 99 percent of retired people live in an apartment, pay rent, and only have SS. You are incorrect. Way incorrect.
@@bigjohnson7415 How many people live exclusively on Social Security?
About 40% of older Americans may be relying exclusively on Social Security for income, according to recent research. That’s a lot of people trying to get by on less than $2000 monthly. That is incredibly low income to people taking in over $250,000 per year. Says with the higher income can easily afford another 6.2% and will feel nothing.
There should never have been a cap on Social Security deductions ~ nobody would be talking about insolvency.
Don’t forget, a huge number of veterans and disabled people also depend on Social Security who cannot work.
A lot of people could use the help with retirement.
45 % of ppl retire in poverty 😮
One guy on UA-cam said if they simply changed the index they use to set COLAs that funding social security would be resolved. Personally, I’d like to see the SS taxation brackets updated.
There shouldn't be any taxes on SS.
@@filly3594 There is no tax on SS if that’s your only income
There should be no tax on SSI. And the cost doesn't matter since we can spend trillions on others, war etc. etc.
Tax Cuts for the Rich, farm subsidies that pay corporate farms NOT to plant food, use of corporate jets for private travel, Yachts- yes Virginia, there was a special carve out for Yacht owners in the 2017 tax Cuts! I can go on.
There is no tax on SSI. There is also no tax on your SS if that’s your only income.
Rong again
@@Satjr35031 That depends on what state one lives in now doesn't it....
@@makiavelli6101 NO State taxes SSI. SS and SSI are two different programs
thinking you"re disconnected from what "middle class" actually has evolved to..
I’m my opinion there should be no taxes on social security until the government keeps their hands off
There is currently no tax on SS if that’s your only income.
@@Satjr35031 well that’s wrong
@@Mason-cd3wr There is no Federal tax on SS if that’s your only income. Regardless of how much you receive. That’s how it works.
Nope Rong Minnesota taxes the hell out of people SSI regardless if that's ther only income or not
@@mikebrostlove13 That’s not how the taxation works in Minnesota on SSI Only income no tax. Period.
And they should make congress pay it as well which they dont
Congress is in SS
It's definitely reasonable to remove the FICA cap. Billionaires & the biggest corporations have been getting off easy with the cap. Now they will also have to continue contributing to fund SS & Medicare. That alone will keep it solvent. Corporations should think of it as a pension plan for workers in America who keep their businesses open, profitable and billionaires wealthy.
Social Security was never paid by tax money. Nope that is an illegal tax.
So, are you saying that it wouldn't be like a bracket? Like if you make $275K, then you'd pay the 12% (or 6.5%) on the $25K above the $250K ?
1. And what is your solution for solving the Social Security problem - I didn't hear any. If you're going to criticize, offer a solution so we can compare. The You Make It, You Keep It bill is by far the best option I have seen for extending the solvency of Social Security. 2. Only 7 % of US households make above $250,000 so classifying them as middle class is absurd. 3. The money saved on taxes by Social Security recipients is far more likely to be returned to the economy than if the money is retained by tax payers making over $250,000.
At this point everyone should just evade taxes and refuse to pay them. They can't arrest everyone.
I guess what's frustrating is that $25000 is pretty much poverty, so if I make $32,000 a year ( which is about $15/hr) I get taxed
So you don't think this tax should have been indexed for inflation over the last 40 years?
SSI was solvent ; until the debt from the gov caused the borrowing from the fund and should be paid back !🤐
I am a life long democrat but I can’t forget when Mr Clinton was president he took $300.000.00 million from the security trust fund to balance the budget.
At the time I thought he was foolish because I knew my generation was huge, the boomers, and the government should not be dipping into it.
Bush #2 put the fund into the expense account.
They never HAD to tap it. They CHOSE to tap it.
SSI and SS are two different programs.
Someone suggests tax capital gain like w2 income. How about that?
Reagan had no Constitutional authority to sign the bill that imposed taxes on SS payments in the first place. It's suppose to be a pension plan not a welfare give away. Read the 5th amendment. It says that the government has no authority to take private property away from people for a public purpose without just compensation. What was the just compensation the people who got SS pensions received? Almost nothing. No sooner was the money paid in then it was paid out. Or it was lent out to other bureaucracies of the Federal government. That is not Just compensation!
Better off getting out of SSA
Better for who ?? Some individuals maybe but be aware SS provides a lot of benefits for those in need such as surviving spouses (and ex-spouses, people disabled and unable to work, and children who lost a parent or parents. The negative impact to society and this back on to us will out weight the minor tax concerns. Keep in the 2 changes being discussed are to raise the income level for the with-holdings. Currently SS with-holding stop around $168k, so this only impacts people who earn more then this amount. The other change is discussing changing how much of the actual monthly paid benefit will be taxed. Currently it on taxes up to 85%, so 15% is not taxed at all. Remember, the with-holdings were taken out pre-tax from your wages, so you were never taxed for it and it lowered your tax bracket.
@@michaelsd284 Social security is a ponzi scheme for anyone under 60 years old.
Do you know by any chance about non-taxable when you are a caregiver of a disabled person but this person must be a spouse?
Depends on state. Az does not allow spouses. Outside that income w2 taxed
Don't push against double taxation of social security benefits. This is a total rip off of all of our seniors that are getting SS benefits. Just change the addition revenue portion of the bill by raising the part of our wages that are taxable by SS to $180,000 or $200,000 and it would more than make up the difference of this small amount of revenue the government makes by taxing SS benefits.
That doesn’t help the 32 million on SS now who solely rely on SS as their only income.
Is that $250K figure AGI or pre deductions?
Take the cap off the amount of earned income that is taxed, no limit! Social security will be funded for ever!
No cap. I agree 100%. If a CEO gets a salary and stock options those stock options should be taxed for social security too, either when they get the options or when they are exercised.
I'm not a college Educated economist, but you say the economy will suffer because the higher end will be taxed at a higher rate and money will exit the economy, but if You're giving a tax break at the lower end, wouldn't funds find their way back into the economy at that point? You seemed to ignore that part.
This country is in so much debt. What ever happened to a balanced budget? If we all ran a budget like the federal government, we would all be bankrupt. How can the government find money for fighting foreign wars, but not find money for social security? The government got us into this mess. Let them restore social security to the sound financial program it used to be. They created the mess. They should fix it!
I favor this bill. Got a better idea for saving SS? It does take money out of the economy. Most seniors will spend the savings they get. If the middle class is the target, I don't get how those making over $250,000 are still in the middle class. Aren't they still in the top 5%?
Congress passed and President Reagan signed into law the 1983 Amendments. Under the '83 Amendments, up to one-half of the value of the Social Security benefit was made potentially taxable income. What I can't understand why retirees keep voting for GOP.
Yeah, and to think Reagan would be considered a RINO today, and not get elected!
The government needs to stop spending money like it’s not theirs. Oh wait, it isn’t theirs.
Helpful information
How many people live exclusively on Social Security?
About 40% of older Americans may be relying exclusively on Social Security for income, according to recent research. That’s a huge number of people trying to get by on less than $2000 monthly. Let’s ask the people taking in an income of $250,000 or more per year if they would like to try living that way… They wouldn’t ~ I am one of the lower income people that could use more money to compete with the corporate greed that is creating this artificial inflation.
People that just live on social security Don't make enough for it to be taxed
This is not a tax on the middle class. It is a tax on the upper class. Only 21% of households make over $250,00
You quickly mentioned something that sounded like moving your client over to a F or S something. What is that?
Pay yourself $1 and the rest in stock options.
Yeah, then you only have to pay 15 percent tax! Wish my effective tax rate was only 15 percent!
That’s what all these supremely over paid CEOs do… Instead of big bonuses, they get stock options, so they only pay a small percentage compared to average working Americans. It’s corrupt and this tax corrects that impact. Mandatory without deductions or write offs. It’s a wonderful idea.
Must be a coincidence that the proposed change primarily benefits the high grade General Schedule federal employees and members of Congress.
SS should be abolished. A poor young person (which the most of young people are) should be financing retirees who had 40 years to prepare for their retirement! Why should a young person with tens of thousands in student loan and total inability to afford a shelter should pay for the retirement of well off retirees?? Instead of spending their money through out their life people should prepare themselves for retirement by not coercing others into paying for it.
should eliminate taxes on social security there's plenty of other things that they can going after like the welfare system the immigration system
What is the immigration system?
The corporate welfare, farm subsidies, lower tax rates on investment income than Earned income. Many more.
Great video Toby!!! Thank you. Mark Rickert
Glad you enjoyed it
From what I understand the 250k is not indexed - so over time the non-taxed doughnut whole will go away. So they are making the same type of issue that was made in 1983/84, right? Index the 250k so there will always be a range not taxed.
Ask Brandon, he voted to tax SS.
Toby, while the tax comes out of the economy, the reduced tax for the Social Security beneficiaries goes into the economy. It will be close to a wash with much of the benefit skewed towards the middle class.
The fact that the "provisional" income requirement for taxing Social Security has not been increased for over 40 damn years is ridiculous. $25,000 might have been a decent amount of money 40 years ago, but is nothing today.
That was intentional, eventually 85% of SS will be taxable income.
Note the 15% not taxed is a good match for the 12.4% paid into the system by you and your employers, so it's sort of like the basis in an IRA.
Look at it this way. You could have a 65 year old couple receiving $50,000 in SS and another $20,000 from a IRA, 401K etc still no Federal tax.
@@Satjr35031 Yeah or you could have a Single person with a small pension and a 401K paying 22% tax bracket every year, plus getting hammered with RMD's once they hit 70... you also did not consider the mandatory withdrawals that couple will be hit with in 5 years. Having 85% of your already taxed SS benefit taxed a second time as ordinary income is ridiculous.
I think every person should pay on every dollar they make. Why should a person making 168k pay the full 6.2% but a person making 336k only pays in effect 3.1% Keep a cap on the employer contribution to help reduce their overall cost provided the employer offers a retirement plan
Why are we forced to pay into SS in the first place ?
You don't understand that his benefits are also pro rated.
How about this…. Quit giving illegals money and shore up the Sovual Security program
That’s great even higher taxes for the young and more free stuff for the old perfect.
Free stuff for the old?
The old has already paid their taxes and are paying taxes on top of taxes now
The young would not pay an extra dime until they make over $250,000/year
Younger generation folks should be voting for the Libertarian party or leaving to work in other countries. Social security is a ponzi scheme.
@@budatkins5917 Alan Greenspan would tell you didn’t pay paid enough into SS. If you need it, I’m sorry that really sucks. I’m just advocating for less burden on all of us. Less misery. What if SS is a horribly inefficient “safety net” and we are obfuscating better methods because change bad?
Thank you very much Toby😊
Yes, Toby. People making larger incomes will contribute like they should have from the beginning. Toby phrases it improperly as if it is a hardship on somebody when it actually corrects the situation and puts the Social Security fund back into solvency.
In case you didn’t notice, the changes were made in 1983 under the Ronald Reagan anti-American agenda. Tax breaks for the wealthy and everybody else can pays for it. Hell no!
40+ years of the phony trickle down economics is enough and Americans are sick of it. We need to thank the party who suggested it and I am confident it is the Democrats. Thank you Joe Biden and Democrats for looking out for average Americans.
🩵💙VOTE BLUE💙🩵
I take care of my parents who are on ssi retired and get 4600 a month total. I work for a bank with 5 kids and take home 3k a month. They order Amazon all day use all my toiletries and say they have no money. I watch your show to do better for my kids. Trying to learn what to do since I know what not to do.
Open an Health Saving Account if you are eligible. It is tax deductible today and will earn tax free and can be withdrawn tax free. You can always use it during retirement to pay for Medicare Premiums and Long-term Care Insurance. Also if the kids are old enough to work (even baby sitting, grass cutting, etc) you can open a ROTH for them to contribute. Fidelity has a child customer ROTH. Lots of video on UA-cam for more info.
So, 5 kids huh? Never learned what causes that? 🤣 Seriously, it's life choices. You made them, quit bitchin about the consequences!
@@bigjohnson7415I believe his issue is with the parents mooching off him and not the kids.
@@michaelsd284 Aaah! Guess I read it wrong.
They need to eliminate the SS cap. or at least reduce for those paying over $500K to say a graduated number. Problem is, many business owners in large government contracts make donations back to their political cronies so that the politicians can pay to be re-elected. How about term limits for Congress and a 10 moratorium on politicians working for as lobbyist. Also, eliminate politicians from being able to trade on insider information. In other words, put their assets in a the SPY or QQQ while they are in Congress. Most stocks (80%) do not do better than the SPY.
God bless you! Best idea I've heard all day!
The whole thing's idiotic. Don't tax the benefits, just make them tax-free and 10% lower. Take the cap off ss taxable income. There. Solvency problem solved. Run the numbers yourself if you don't believe me.
U didn't know what u r talking about - taxes will go up on rich people.
remove the caps....it should never have been on there in the first place
Tax Social Security with no indexing, brought to you by Ronald Freaking Reagan.
And the whole Ponzi Scheme of SS was brought to you by that great Socialist, FDR.
And the House (Speaker was Tip O'Neill, a Democrat) and the Senate.
The patch worked for forty years, that's forever in political terms. They certainly didn't foresee the crashing birthdate.
And who created the Ponzi Scheme called SS in the first place? Why, no other than that racist, Socialist president FDR.
Non-labor income is the best way to avoid paying into this ponzi scheme. For those that own real estate properties or passive income from stocks and bonds.
Taxes pay for Roads, Police, Fire etc... So millions of people shouldn't have to pay for services they use everyday? That doesn't seem fair for all those still working paying taxes for everyone else
There is no Federal tax on SSI
sure there is , they take fed tax out of my ck each month. Maybe you should call the government and TELL THEM there is no fed tax on SS. I would appreciate it.
@@sonnytimpkins9699 Sonny there is no Federal tax on SS or SSIif that’s your only income
@@Satjr35031If you are single, on SS, and that is your ONLY income, you are mostly right. But if you have other income, dividends, rental income, interest from savings accounts, 401k disbursement, you are incorrect. Depending on how much you have coming in, you could be taxed on up to 85 percent of your SS income when combined with other incomes.
For most people SS is just part of retirement income, but I will grant you there are millions of poor people who SS IS their only income, who saved nothing at all their entire working life. That's sad, but life choices have a lot to do with that.
The joke is, ""less then 20% of ssi persons receive over the 25 k max in a years checks""., so who was really paying tax. It's a con statement. People with other incomes and ssi combined. They should pay tax of above. Now workers and employers are on the hook AND BIG EARNERS
Keep in mind it's not just SSI plus wages but retirement account withdrawals count towards the $25K/$34K combined income also. Unless living off SSI only, likely have these as well.
Don’t confuse SSI with SS . Two different things.
Oh noooooooo!!!
We can’t POSSIBLY tax the baby boomers! Not while they earned money, not while they just use it. Never!
As a Xennial tax lawyer myself, I want to know what happened to those medical death panels we were promised.
Well, I'd rather a bill like this not get any air time whatsoever. I'd rather not even know about it as It will never see the light of day EVER... If SS was on a sound footing maybe but since Social Security is soon to be insolvent I'm more than certain it won't pass through all the hurdles with the biggest being the Republican controlled Senate (nope) then a signature from the President (maybe). Not Gonna Happen PERIOD .... BOOM ... GONE 😹
I receive social security retirement benefits and would love it if they were not taxable, but I think this proposal is unfair. The proposal increases taxes on high earners without a corresponding increase in benefits. This boils down to an act of welfare. SS is not supposed to be a welfare program. You are supposed to get a higher retirement benefit if you pay more into the system. The payout system is already skewed toward the benefit of low earners.
Ok....Everyone just stop paying taxes. We'll show 'em.
or vote for the Libertarian party
The Rich get away with it!
Stop lying, middle class income is not 250K+, so saying taxing are going up on middle class is a LIE.
It goes right back into the economy by the recipients! Boo hoo.
500 k seems rich.....until you sell your parents assets after they pass away. Their 3 bedroom ranch 20 miles out of Boston, Massachusetts will sell for 1 million dollars.
P.S.
KY jelly comes in 55 gallon drums and may be tax deductable.😮
They won’t look at assets. But focus on your lifetime earnings Probably change the last bend point from 15% to 5%
In case you aren't aware, the estate tax doesn't kick in until $15 MILLION dollars! And they're talking $500k ANNUAL income, not net worth. Do you know how many people earn $500k a year? Less than 1 percent.
Old news
Tobie you look just like mt cousin. Crazy if want to see let me know. Doppelganger
If they can tax social security they can also tax Roth. Rules meant to be broken.
No doubt. I have kept my Traditional IRA.
Times or war you lose all promises . See this in all of history. You can lose everything you earned if time in history is right.