Social Security Administration Sends Misleading Email

Saturday, July 05, 2025

The emails say nearly 9 in 10 Social Security beneficiaries won't pay income taxes on their benefits in the future. But the Trump tax law did not directly address Social Security.

Posted by qcp at 11:33 AM | 17 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Yeah, they're full of ----.

#1 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-07-05 10:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Lies.

And the lying liars who tell them.

#2 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-07-05 12:14 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"All administrations sometimes hide, shade or slant the truth-and occasionally lie outright. The present administration is different in that it lies regularly, blatantly, heedlessly."

Richard Primus

#3 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2025-07-05 05:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

How is it misleading when nearly 9 in 10 (88%) Social Security beneficiaries won't pay income taxes on their benefits in the future?

#4 | Posted by visitor_ at 2025-07-05 08:08 PM | Reply

"How is it misleading when nearly 9 in 10 (88%) Social Security beneficiaries won't pay income taxes on their benefits in the future?"

Because folks who ONLY get social security already pay ZERO federal income taxes. Even a couple getting the max $5,108/mo, total ~$122,500 income; ZERO income taxes. That's CURRENT law.

It takes other income to make Social Security taxable.

Also...be careful about the results the Trump Administration is claiming: everything in the BBB assumes 4% annual growth.

One analyst company admitted it was "many times the projections". Meanwhile, Deloitte is predicting growth lower than inflation.

#5 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-05 09:03 PM | Reply

@#5 ... Because folks who ONLY get social security already pay ZERO federal income taxes. ...

Exactly.

I have never seen any evidence to the contrary.

#6 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-07-05 09:11 PM | Reply

@#5 ... Also...be careful about the results the Trump Administration is claiming: everything in the BBB assumes 4% annual growth ...

Also, yeah.

Another example of hopeful, but failed, ~trickle down economics of the 80'?~

I wish I knew.

I have opinions, but, that's a whole different thread ...

So, I'll stop here.

#7 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-07-05 09:14 PM | Reply

I believe the bill gives seniors a new tax deduction. A $6000 deduction ($12,000 married, filing jointly) if you are 65 or older. I think the deduction is available to those earning $75,000 or less, then the deduction tapers down to zero up to $175,000 income (higher if married, filing jointly.) I also believe that the deduction is independent of whether or not the standard deduction is taken.

This is separate from any sort of taxes on Soc Sec benefits. Perhaps for some people the deduction will cancel out their taxes owed on Social Security, perhaps not. And I believe the deduction is available to seniors regardless whether they get Social Security or not.

#5 Danforth, now that interesting about zero income tax on Social Security already in place, unless there is other income. I didn't know that. Anyways, maybe you can tell me if I got it correct about the new tax deduction for seniors? Oh, also think it is temporary...until like 2028.

#8 | Posted by Idependant97 at 2025-07-05 09:32 PM | Reply

For a married couple, I ran the most extreme numbers I could find: maxing out every year, waiting until 70 to start ...

Just under $122,600 income. ZERO federal taxes due.

Even another $6,250 in interest wouldn't trigger income taxes.

Or $10,000 in dividends ... as long as at least $6900 are qualified dividends (Abbott, J&J, Walmart, et Al=all 100% qualified)

#9 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-05 09:41 PM | Reply

Idependant, everything you posted in #8 was spot-on. Nice analysis; It shows you've got a full understanding.

Frankly, I'm a bit stunned by the numbers I'm running; they're from BEFORE the additional 12K reduction of taxable income for seniors.

WITH the higher deduction, the qualified dividends could be $28,500, in addition to the $122,600 Social Security ...

And ZERO income taxes due.

Holy Fakk!

#10 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-05 09:54 PM | Reply

@10 Danforth,

Then add in the new deductions and even more tax free income is possible, right? Specifically tips are tax free and the first $12,500 of overtimes is tax free, if I'm not mistaken. ($25k of overtime if married, filing jointly.) I think both of these start to phase out at $150,000 incomes ($300k if married, filing jointly.)

Found this at www.cbiz.com although I think it's before the bill went to the House.

Anyways, maybe Danforth, you can run some numbers using that info too? (And thanks for the complement about nice analysis....I often don't know what I am doing, but sometimes I do...lol...)

#11 | Posted by Idependant97 at 2025-07-05 10:08 PM | Reply

" run some numbers using that info?"

Okay, let's add stuff:

Still using 70yr olds w/max SS. $122,600.

Add $13,000 in wages, add $2,400 in overtime, add $25,000 in tips.

$163,000 of income. ZERO federal income taxes due.

===

That said, the above scenario would pay $3100 in PAYROLL taxes during the year.

#12 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-05 10:22 PM | Reply

Note: I didn't include the max overtime or tips for a couple, because income taxes begin after $13k of wages ...

And it would be a red flag to have too high a percentage of overtime (eg, over 40% might trigger an audit).

Then again, I'm sure it's mathematically possible for a 70 yr old couple to have $170K of income and owe ZERO federal income taxes.

#13 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-06 02:04 AM | Reply

@#13 ... a red flag to have too high a percentage of overtime (eg, over 40% might trigger an audit). ...

And the audits seem to target the lower income people, because (now that the IRS staff has been drastically DOGE'd) there are not enough auditors with the capability to pursue the wealthy tax cheats. And apparent by-product of DOGE.

#14 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-07-06 02:24 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

@#14

Typo alert ...

And apparent by-product of DOGE.

-- should be --

An apparent intentional by-product of DOGE.

Apologies.

#15 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-07-06 02:26 AM | Reply

So the letter was accurate.

#16 | Posted by visitor_ at 2025-07-06 11:31 AM | Reply

" So the letter was accurate."

No, it wasn't. There are several errors, including the statement about eliminating taxes on Social Security. No such provision exists.

Also, the 88% claim doesn't pass the smell test...especially when you realize 4% compounded growth is baked into the claims. Nor when you realize half those people ALREADY pay no income taxes on their Social Security.

#17 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-07-06 11:53 AM | Reply