(NewsNation) — Social Security’s retirement trust fund is expected to run dry in roughly six years, and the longer Congress waits to act, the more painful the eventual trade-offs become.
Without reforms, retirees face a 22% benefit cut in late 2032, reducing the average monthly check by roughly $450, according to the latest projections.
Lawmakers are unlikely to let that happen, but kicking the can down the road has consequences.
Social Security: 4 options to shore up the program
“Many options that would have once restored solvency are no longer available,” the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget wrote in an analysis earlier this month. “Continued inaction has the potential to take even more reforms off the table.”
Delaying action won’t just leave policymakers with fewer options — it will also make the necessary changes more severe.
Potential revenue-raising fixes — like increasing the payroll tax rate or raising the cap on taxable earnings — would need to be more substantial the longer lawmakers wait. The same is true for potential reductions in benefit.
Waiting also leaves less time to phase in changes gradually and leaves workers and retirees with fewer years to prepare.
Learn more about the Social Security fixes on the table.
Why waiting makes Social Security harder to fix
The longer Congress waits to address the shortfall, the more costly the eventual fixes become.
In 2024, Social Security’s trustees estimated that restoring long-term solvency by raising the payroll tax alone would have required a 3.33 percentage point increase, bringing the rate from 12.4% to 15.73%.
Just two years later, that same approach would require a 4.25-percentage-point increase, bringing the payroll tax rate to 16.65%, according to the latest trustees report.
Lawmakers could instead focus on lowering costs by reducing benefits, but that option has become more difficult, too.
Here’s what your Social Security COLA could be in 2027
In 2024, restoring solvency through benefit cuts alone would have required a 20.8% reduction in scheduled benefits, but that estimate has risen to 25.2% in the latest report.
Large payroll tax increases or steep benefit cuts are likely to be politically unpopular, which is why many proposals combine revenue increases with future cost reductions.
Some options that could have once restored long-term solvency on their own are no longer enough.
If policymakers had eliminated the payroll tax cap in 1995 without increasing future benefits for higher earners, it would have generated enough revenue to extend Social Security’s solvency to 2094, according to the CRFB.
Today, that same change would extend solvency by just 21 years and close about two-thirds of the gap.
Why Congress hasn’t fixed Social Security yet
Policymakers have known for decades that Social Security’s finances are unsustainable, but so far, they’ve had little electoral incentive to address the issue.
Politicians know any solution will require difficult trade-offs, risking backlash from some of the nation’s most consistent voters.
In 2025, federal lawmakers held only two Social Security-related hearings, according to data cited by the Brookings Institution — the fewest since 2020.
But the political math is changing. Senators elected in the 2026 election cycle will be in office as Social Security’s retirement trust fund approaches depletion, raising the stakes for candidates to outline their plans.
“This election season would be a good time to put reform on the agenda to force candidates to engage and to raise public awareness,” Brookings scholars wrote in a recent commentary.
The last major Social Security overhaul came in 1983. Back then, the program was just months away from being unable to pay full benefits on time.
Four decades later, lawmakers are once again facing a shrinking window to act — but this time, the scale of the challenge is even larger.
Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.
