Millions of Americans could see larger Social Security checks under new legislation introduced by Democratic lawmakers, though the proposal faces an uphill battle in Congress.
Rep. John Larson and Sen. Richard Blumenthal introduced the Social Security 2100 Act on July 22, a bill designed to increase benefits while extending the program’s long-term funding that could help seniors save money in retirement.
Find Out: 13 moves seniors could benefit from but often forget about.
How much the proposed increase could add
The legislation would produce a benefit increase of roughly 2% for current and future recipients. More precisely, it would raise the first factor in Social Security’s benefit formula from 90% to 93% for benefits payable from 2027 through 2036.
The actual percentage and dollar increase would therefore depend on how the revised formula applies to each person. Someone receiving $1,000 a month would get an extra $20, bringing the monthly benefit to $1,020. A $1,500 check would rise by $30 to $1,530, while a $2,000 payment would increase by $40 to
$2,040.
Using the June 2026 average retired-worker benefit of about $2,084 per month, a 2% increase would add roughly $42, lifting the monthly payment to about $2,126. Over a year, that would amount to just over $500 in additional benefits.
Although the increase may sound modest, it would be built into the recipient’s monthly benefit rather than paid as a one-time bonus, and future cost-of-living adjustments (COLA) would apply to the higher benefit amount.
Shopping for cheaper auto insurance? Enter your zip code here to get started.
The bill includes more than a 2% increase
The proposed legislation goes beyond the initial 2% increase. Larson and Blumenthal also want to strengthen the minimum benefit for people who spent decades working in lower-paying jobs, helping ensure long-term workers do not retire into poverty.
The bill would instead use the Consumer Price Index for the Elderly, or CPI-E, for the relevant adjustment period. Supporters argue that CPI-E better reflects older Americans’ spending because it gives greater weight to expenses such as healthcare and housing.
CPI-E does not rise faster every year, so larger COLAs would not be guaranteed annually. Over longer periods, however, supporters believe it could more accurately track the costs seniors face.
How Democrats would pay for the expansion
The legislation would raise additional revenue by increasing taxes on higher-income Americans. Workers currently pay Social Security payroll tax only on earnings up to an annual taxable maximum. In 2026, that limit is $184,500.
One of the biggest changes would eliminate the current Social Security payroll tax cap. Under current law, workers only pay Social Security payroll taxes on earnings up to the annual taxable wage base. Income above that amount is not subject to the Social Security payroll tax.
The bill would also impose a Social Security tax on certain investment income for taxpayers earning more than $400,000 annually. Supporters argue those changes would strengthen Social Security’s finances while asking wealthier Americans to contribute more toward the program.
Save Money: Things to cut when living on retirement (many people ignore #11)
Addressing Social Security’s funding challenges
Larson argues benefit reductions should not be used to address Social Security’s long-term funding challenges.
“Benefit cuts are not the answer; we need to make the wealthy pay their fair share,” Larson said when introducing the legislation. He said the bill would strengthen benefits while helping protect the program’s finances.
Blumenthal also linked the proposal to rising living costs facing retirees. “Social Security is a promise that must be kept,” he said. “The Trump Administration’s threats to Social Security and skyrocketing costs require common sense steps to expand benefits and ensure financial stability.”
Social Security provides the primary source of retirement income for roughly four out of five older Americans, making even relatively small benefit increases meaningful for many households.
The bill also targets Social Security administration
The proposal includes several operational changes beyond benefit increases. It would reverse staffing reductions at the Social Security Administration, prohibit future closures of Social Security field offices by the administration, and restrict political appointees and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) from accessing sensitive Social Security data systems.
Those provisions reflect broader Democratic concerns about recent administrative changes at the agency alongside the financial proposals contained in the bill.
The Social Security 2100 Act faces difficult odds
Despite being reintroduced, the Social Security 2100 Act faces a challenging path through Congress. Republicans currently control both chambers, making it unlikely legislation centered on higher taxes for upper-income earners would receive sufficient support to advance.
Social Security reform remains one of the most politically difficult issues in Washington. Although lawmakers broadly agree the program faces long-term financial challenges, they remain sharply divided over how to address them.
Retire like the rich: 14 ways you could build wealth in your 50s.
What it could mean for retirees
Even if the legislation does not become law this Congress, it highlights the growing debate over how Social Security should be strengthened before the trust funds face projected shortfalls.
Future proposals may continue to focus on larger benefits, higher taxes on upper-income households, changes to annual COLAs, or some combination of those approaches. For current retirees, however, no changes take effect unless Congress passes the legislation and the president signs it into law.
Bottom line
The Social Security 2100 Act would increase monthly benefits by 2%, strengthen minimum benefits, adopt a new inflation measure for future COLAs, and raise additional revenue by increasing taxes on higher-income Americans.
While someone receiving the average retired-worker benefit could see roughly $42 more per month under the proposal, the bill faces long odds in the current Congress. For now, it represents another opening position in the broader debate over how to eliminate some stress living on Social Security without cutting payments.
More from FinanceBuzz:
