Social Security’s current trajectory puts it on track for sweeping benefit cuts in as little as eight years. President Trump is likely to focus on making America’s leading retirement program more cost-efficient. Unfortunately, efficiency-based reductions won’t make a dent into Social Security’s $23.2 trillion (and growing) long-term funding shortfall.
If President Trump’s first term in office is any indication, his promise to “not touch Social Security” won’t last long.
When 2025 began, the average monthly Social Security check for retired workers was $1,975.34. Though this might not sound like a lot, more retirees than you might realize count on their Social Security income as their financial foundation.
In each of the previous 23 years, national pollster Gallup has surveyed retirees to determine how important Social Security income is to their financial well-being. In every poll, 80% to 90% of respondents noted it was necessary, in some capacity, to help cover their expenses.
Although supporting and strengthening America’s leading retirement program should be a priority for our elected officials, the financial health of Social Security has been deteriorating for four decades. Reforms need to be enacted to improve the program’s financial health — and that may include President Donald Trump breaking his campaign promise and proposing cuts to Social Security.
Social Security is potentially eight years away from sweeping benefit cuts
Before digging into the details of what may come to pass, it’s important to understand why Social Security’s financial foundation is crumbling.
Ever since the first Social Security check was mailed in 1940, the Social Security Board of Trustees has issued an annual report outlining the financial health of the program. It details where every dollar in income comes from, as well as traces where those dollars end up.
What’s even more intriguing are the long-term (75-year) forecasts provided by the Trustees concerning the solvency of Social Security’s trust funds. Though the program is incapable of going bankrupt or becoming insolvent with the way it’s currently set up, the existing payout schedule, inclusive of cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs), may not be sustainable.
Every year since 1985, the Trustees Report has cautioned of a long-term funding obligation shortfall. In simple terms, estimated outlays (benefits and, to a lesser extent, administrative expenses to operate Social Security) would outpace collected income in the 75 years following the release of a report. The 2024 Trustees Report pegged this long-term shortfall at a staggering $23.2 trillion.
The more immediate concern is the forecast depletion of the Old-Age and Survivor Insurance Trust Fund’s (OASI) asset reserves by 2033. If this excess cash built up since inception were to be exhausted, sweeping benefit cuts of up to 21% would await retired workers and survivor beneficiaries.
The culprit behind this financial maelstrom for Social Security is a confluence of ongoing demographic changes, such as rising income inequality, a historically low U.S. birth rate, and a steep decline in the legal net migration rate since 1998.
President Trump will likely propose efficiency-based Social Security cuts
Lawmakers wanting to strengthen Social Security have three choices: increase income, reduce spending, or do some combination of the two. But given that any changes to Social Security would result in some group of people being worse off than they were before, it’s typically an issue that lawmakers steer clear of.
Presidential candidates don’t have the luxury of sweeping key issues under the rug. They’re expected to offer concrete ideas as to how a clearly ailing program can be improved.
While on the campaign trail, then-candidate Donald Trump made clear that he wouldn’t touch Social Security. By this, he meant that no changes would be made that result in sweeping benefit cuts, as some current and future retirees fear. This would mean increases to the full retirement age are off the table.
However, President Trump did leave the door wide open for efficiency-based Social Security cuts. In a December 2024 interview with Meet the Press, he responded to a question from TV journalist Kristen Welker by noting, “I said to people we’re not touching Social Security, other than we make it more efficient. But the people are going to get what they’re getting.”
In each of Donald Trump’s first four years in the White House, his presidential budget proposals called for a variety of efficiency-based cuts to Social Security. Based on projections, these actions would have reduced outlays by a cumulative:
- $72 billion from fiscal 2018 through fiscal 2027 (the fiscal year ends on Sept. 30).
- $64 billion from fiscal 2019 through fiscal 2028.
- $26 billion from fiscal 2020 through fiscal 2029.
- $24 billion from fiscal 2021 through fiscal 2030.
For example, President Trump’s last budget proposal aimed to make the Disability Insurance Trust Fund more efficient by halving the retroactive benefits that workers with disabilities could receive from 12 months to six months. This would have accounted for more than half of the forecast $24 billion in 10-year cost savings.
Though Donald Trump won’t propose sweeping Social Security benefit cuts, all signs point to him breaking his promise to “not touch Social Security” by proposing efficiency-based cuts.
