Social Security - January 2012 and Beyond

by Guest_Post January 17, 2012 4:14 AM

This article is reprinted with the permission of Bruce Kasting.
Then full article and other work may be found at : http://brucekrasting.blogspot.com/

 

The January 2012 numbers for Social Security (SS) show a mixed picture. The results mirror what is going on in the economy. There is clear evidence that revenues at SS are recovering; there is equally clear evidence that America’s social expenditures are rising at a rate that exceeds the rate of recovery.

The following numbers are adjusted for any consequences of the 2% payroll tax deduction for 2011 and 2012. As a reminder, the Treasury pays into to SS every month an amount equal to the 2% shortfall. The country ends up more indebted, but there is no net consequence to SS.

Clearly, the problem is that benefit payments are increasing more rapidly than revenues. There are two contributing forces pushing up costs, (1) 10,000 additional people sign up for benefits every day of the week and (2) inflation (COLA) is rising. The January 2012 YoY increase in benefit payments was $4.1B. Of that amount, approximately $2.1B is attributable to inflation; the balance of $2B is due to more folks getting checks.

We crossed a big corner at SS in 2010 when the first annual cash flow deficit was reported. SS will never again see a cash surplus. The only question is how rapidly the deficits will rise. It’s a bit early in the year for me to provide a credible 2012 forecast for SS. My read of the January numbers confirms my suspicions. The improvement in the economy will be trumped by increasing benefit costs. Net-net, a modest deterioration in the cash position is my base case. I think SS will produce a $56B cash shortfall in 2012 (2010 = -49B, 2011 – 47B).

The expense side of the SS equation can’t be altered. The only variables that make a difference are interest rates and the economy (jobs).

The interest rate side of the equation is easy to contemplate. SS’s income from interest is going to decline in 2012 and beyond. Ben Bernanke’s ZIRP, QE and Twist have seen to that. Ben has made it clear that interest rates will remain at historical lows for well into the future. SS is America’s biggest saver ($2.6 Trillion), it will therefore pay a price as the low interest rate environment is endlessly extended.

In June of this year, SS will re-invest its maturing bonds (and any cash it has) in a new strip of securities that have maturities from 1 to 15 years. The interest rate for these Special Issue Treasury Securities is set by a (stupid) 60-year old formula. This year, the formula will produce a yield for the new investments that is the lowest in history. In the next few years, all of the high coupon bonds will be rolling off. The old bonds will be replaced with much lower yielding assets.

This simply does not add up. SS will have to significantly revise downward its projections for interest incomes (there is no way the Fed is going to back off ZIRP anytime soon).

The economy is much harder to ponder. As of today, there is a case than can be made for continued job growth. But for how long? America has a bad habit of slipping into a recession every four years or so. The last one was in 2008, so we’re due. I think that the US will muddle through the first part of 2012 with continued modest job growth. However, a slowdown looks to be in the cards by the end of the year. As of today, there are a dozen economic headwinds that will kick in as of 1/1/13 - all of the Bush tax cuts, the SS payroll reduction and a substantial cutback in government spending (the sequestered amounts).

If we experience a recession in 2013, and the Fed maintains its low interest rate policies, it will be a very bad year for SS. The cash deficit would explode under these conditions. It could easily exceed $100b. The wheels will come off of SS’s cart. As we are seeing now, it is extremely difficult for SS to bounce back in good times. it will be impossible if we hit another economic slow patch.

This is precisely the scenario I’m anticipating for 2013. It will be a decisive year. If we end up going down an economic road as I have described, then SS will fall into full deficit (operating cash deficit + interest income). That would happen circa 2015. The Social Security Trust Fund is forecasting this event but it believes it will happen in 2021. When people realize that the Trust Fund has topped out, and the implications are understood, significant changes at SS will follow.

I point readers to a raging debate going on in Japan. To cover the growing deficits at Japan’s equivalent of SS, consumption taxes are being increased from 5% to 10% on everything purchased in the country. This massive tax increase is far too low to cover the problem. To bring balance to the system, VAT taxes have to rise to 17%.

Japan is in a different situation than the US. Its population is even older (and aging more rapidly) than ours. As in many other examples, the US is about ten-years behind Japan. But we are catching up quickly. In just a few years, America will have a similar raging debate on SS. We too will be faced with a dilemma. Either taxes have to raised, or benefits have to come down. The alternative is that the US follows Japan into the land of 200% debt-to-GDP. Unlike Japan, The US can’t survive at that rate. We will blow up before we get to 200%.

We won't see any reforms in America’s entitlement programs in 2012. The election will see to that. The immediate priorities of 2013 will not include SS. The other problems facing the economy will be more pressing. But by 2014, the jig will be up. By then, there will have been so much damage to SS that a very significant set of changes will be required to minimize what will then be seen as a systemic risk.

 

Tags:

Deficit | Payroll taxes

Comments (1) -

Vince
Vince
1/21/2012 10:52:58 AM #

Government’s failure to make Social Security checks and balances, and police the program, is part of the SS problem:

Our Social Security program was setup by the American government to provide some support for Americans after their retirement.  It was never meant to support them 100%.  Most Americans invested into other areas so that they would have a comfortable retirement.

In June, 2004, President Bush's Social Security Administration 'negotiated' a deal with Mexico named "Tantalization", to allow Mexicans who work for a period of time (legally or illegally) in the United States to collect money from the U.S. Social Security system when they retire in Mexico. Fortunately due to an outcry from thousands of U.S. citizens this legislation was never sent to the house for a vote in fear that Bush would not get it passed. This is a perfect example of our government officials willing to send our Social Security funds out of this country.

Foreign companies have been taking advantage of the American social security insurance for decades.  Workers that were going to be eligible for retirement within 10 years were transferred from their country to work within their American counterpart companies in the United States. Each of these (non citizen employees) would pay into the social security program on their earnings, making sure that they accumulated at least 40 quarters (or credits) that would make them eligible to collect SS at retirement age. At retirement age the majority of these employees move back to their home land and the United States continues to send their SS checks to them. This practice continues today. I say if you are a non citizen collecting Social Security you must stay in this country to collect, no checks should be sent outside this country to non-citizens period.

What policing of these foreign countries do we have to know weather or not these people are actually living. There is none!  It is a known fact that relatives of people who have past away years ago continue to collect these SS checks. The Unites States has no idea that they are sending checks to a person that is no longer living.  How many checks are we sending to other countries without knowing whether or not those people are living? A mere signature on a piece of paper is not enough to verify that a person is still living.

Social Security restrictions prohibit sending payments to individuals in Cuba, North Korea, Cambodia, Vietnam or areas that were in the former Soviet Union (other than Armenia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Russia). Generally, you cannot receive payments while you are in one of these countries, and they will not send your payments to anyone for you.

In the Unites States if a person who receives Social Security benefits dies, a benefit is not payable for the month of death. For example, if a beneficiary died any time in June, the payment dated July (which is payment for June) should be returned to the sender. This is controlled by several reporting methods within the United States. What controls do we have in foreign countries?

I feel that if any non citizen wants to move out of the United States and live in another country they should forfeit their social security. We should not be sending social security funds outside the country to non-citizens, if they want their checks sent to another country let them become a U.S. citizen.

How much of the United States Social Security is being sent out of this country? Does anyone have records showing exactly how many checks are being sent outside the country to non-citizens?  How much does it total?  It would also be interesting to find out how many recipients are actually not living today, while checks are being cashed, by members of their families.  

Add comment




 
biuquote
  • Comment
  • Preview