Seven Social Security bills in Congress and what each would change

 

With the midterm elections a few weeks away, Social Security legislation has been piling up in Congress. Seven bills introduced since June show how wide the range of ideas has become. Some would raise taxes on high earners, and others would simply let grieving families apply for survivor benefits online. None of them has moved past referral to committee. Taken together, though, they show where the debate over the program's finances is likely to go once lawmakers take it up in earnest.

The deadline behind the bills

The 2026 Social Security Trustees Report projects that the trust fund paying retirement and survivor benefits, known formally as the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) fund, will run out of reserves in the fourth quarter of 2032. Measured together with the Disability Insurance fund, the projected depletion date is 2034. If the two funds were combined, incoming tax revenue would cover about 83 percent of scheduled benefits at that point, according to the Congressional Research Service's summary of the report. Under current law, benefits would be cut to whatever revenue can support.

Nancy Altman, president of the advocacy group Social Security Works, has noted that this leaves Congress roughly six years to act, which means senators elected this November will likely still be in office when a solvency bill passes. She expects that a Democratic House majority would bring an expansion bill to the floor but does not expect one to become law in this Congress. In her view, the realistic sequence is a clearer debate heading into 2028 and legislative action in 2029. She named three existing bills as likely starting points: the Social Security Expansion Act, the Social Security 2100 Act, and the Medicare and Social Security Fair Share Act.

Martha Shedden, president and co-founder of the National Association of Registered Social Security Analysts, takes a similar view of timing. She sees 2027 as the year the debate gets specific, not the year it ends. Her expectation is that any final agreement will be a package: some new revenue from higher earners, targeted changes to future benefits, and protections for lower-income and longtime beneficiaries.

There are early signs of cross-party movement on the revenue side. Max Richtman, president and CEO of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, pointed to a plan released June 23 by Sens. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) to raise the payroll tax cap. His group regards it as evidence that at least some Republicans accept that revenue will have to be part of the solution.

The seven bills

1. Strengthening Social Security Act (H.R. 9296)

Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-Calif.) introduced this bill on June 11 with six cosponsors. Its main financing change would gradually eliminate the payroll tax cap, the ceiling on earnings subject to the 12.4 percent Social Security tax. That ceiling is $184,500 for 2026. The phase-out would begin in 2028 and be complete in 2032, after which all wages would be taxed.

On the benefit side, a surviving spouse would receive the greater of the deceased spouse's primary insurance amount or 75 percent of the couple's combined benefits, subject to a cap. The bill would also change the formula Social Security uses to calculate a worker's basic benefit, known as the primary insurance amount. In 2026, that formula replaces 90 percent of the first $1,286 of a worker's average indexed monthly earnings, 32 percent of earnings between $1,286 and $7,749, and 15 percent of earnings above $7,749. The bill would raise the 90 percent rate to 95 percent in one-point steps from 2032 through 2036 and would also raise the $1,286 threshold. Benefits calculated under the new formula would rise for every worker, with the largest percentage gains going to lower earners.

Separately, the bill would calculate annual cost-of-living adjustments using the Consumer Price Index for the Elderly (CPI-E), which gives more weight to costs such as health care.

2. Social Security 2100 Act (H.R. 9519)

Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.) reintroduced this bill on June 29 with four cosponsors. He last brought it forward in 2023.

The 2026 version would remove the payroll tax wage cap for earnings after 2026. Because high earners would then pay tax on all of their wages, the bill would also let those extra wages count when their benefits are calculated, but at a much lower rate. In the benefit formula described above, earnings above the old cap would be replaced at 1 percent, compared with 15 percent for the top layer of earnings today. In practice, a high earner would pay considerably more in tax and see only a small increase in benefits.

The bill would also apply the 12.4 percent Social Security tax rate to net investment income for taxpayers whose modified adjusted gross income exceeds $400,000, building on the existing net investment income tax. Cost-of-living adjustments would use whichever index is higher, CPI-W or CPI-E. Benefits would rise across the board from 2027 through 2036 by temporarily raising the formula's 90 percent rate to 93 percent, and the income thresholds at which benefits become taxable would increase.

Some media coverage has described this bill as applying the payroll tax only to wages above $400,000. Earlier versions were structured that way. The text introduced in June removes the wage cap entirely and uses $400,000 as the income threshold for the new tax on investment income.

3. PROMISE Act (S. 4979)

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) introduced the Protecting Retirement Opportunities and Maintaining Income Security for Everyone Act on July 14. Its seven cosponsors include Republican Sens. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.

This bill does not set policy itself. It assigns the Social Security Advisory Board to prepare recommendations and legislative language that would let the trust funds pay 100 percent of scheduled benefits for at least 50 years. It then sets out procedures that would require both the House and Senate to vote on that legislation.

4. SWIFT Act (H.R. 9763)

Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.) introduced the Surviving Widow(er) Income Fair Treatment Act on July 16 with six cosponsors. The bill focuses on survivors.

Under current law, when a worker starts retirement benefits early and then dies, the surviving spouse's benefit is capped at the higher of the worker's reduced benefit or 82.5 percent of the worker's primary insurance amount. This rule is known as the widow(er)'s limit. Supporters say the SWIFT Act would remove that penalty, and it would let survivors increase their benefit by delaying their claim, much as retired workers earn delayed retirement credits.

The bill would also allow disabled widows, widowers, and surviving divorced spouses to receive full survivor benefits at any age, rather than waiting until age 50. Benefits for a surviving parent caring for a child would continue until the child turns 18, or 19 if still in elementary or secondary school, instead of ending at 16. The Social Security Administration would have to publish a guide to survivor benefits and mail it to surviving spouses after learning of a death.

5. POWR Act (H.R. 10235)

Rep. Sánchez returned on Sept. 2 with the Protecting Our Widows and Widowers in Retirement Act, which has six cosponsors. It takes the survivor provision from her June bill and offers it as a standalone measure. A surviving spouse would receive the greater of the deceased spouse's primary insurance amount or 75 percent of the couple's combined benefit, subject to a cap set in the bill.

This change matters most for two-earner couples. Under current rules, the survivor keeps only the larger of the two checks, so a household with two similar benefits can lose up to half its Social Security income when one spouse dies.

6. Survivor Benefits Application Modernization Act (H.R. 10428)

Reps. Sharice Davids (D-Kan.) and Gabe Evans (R-Colo.) introduced this bipartisan bill on Sept. 16. It would require the Social Security Administration to let applicants book appointments online within 180 days of enactment and to accept survivor benefit applications through a secure online portal within one year. Within three years, the agency would report to Congress on processing times, administrative savings, and cases of fraud and identity theft.

7. Blue Collar Social Security Fairness Act

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) introduced this bill in late September. It has no cosponsors yet. The bill would set a full retirement age of 60 for people who spent much of their careers in physically demanding work, such as nursing, roofing, construction, and factory work. The Social Security Administration, working with the Labor and Health and Human Services departments, would publish a list of qualifying occupations and update it every three years. Workers would generally need about 20 years in qualifying jobs, measured under a points formula that gives more weight to work done later in a career. The bill does not specify how the added cost would be paid for.

What this means for retirement planning

Every bill above is at the starting line. Most have only Democratic sponsors, and the two with bipartisan support deal with process and administration, not with taxes or benefit levels. Introduction is cheap. Passage is not.

Shedden's caution to advisors and their clients is worth repeating in plain terms: the costliest mistake would be to change a claiming decision today out of worry that the program is about to vanish. Reform of some kind is likely, but no one yet knows its contents, its start date, or which birth years it will reach.

For now, claiming decisions should rest on the law as written. Two groups have reason to follow these bills more closely than most. High earners would face higher taxes under several proposals. Married couples, particularly those where one spouse would rely heavily on the other's work record after a death, would be affected by the survivor provisions. Both groups can plan under today's rules and revisit the plan if a bill clears committee.

Until then, these are proposals. A retirement plan built on proposals is a guess.

Sources

•      Congress.gov, bill text and status for H.R. 9296, H.R. 9519, S. 4979, and H.R. 10235 (119th Congress)

•      GovInfo, H.R. 9763, Surviving Widow(er) Income Fair Treatment Act of 2026, introduced text

•      Social Security Administration, Contribution and Benefit Base (ssa.gov/oact/cola/cbb.html)

•      Social Security Administration, Primary Insurance Amount formula and 2026 bend points (ssa.gov/oact/cola/piaformula.html)

•      Social Security Administration, POMS RS 00615.320, limitation on widow(er)'s benefits

•      Congressional Research Service, "Social Security: Selected Findings of the 2026 Annual Report" (IF13256)

•      Office of Rep. Sharice Davids, announcement of the Survivor Benefits Application Modernization Act, Sept. 16, 2026

•      Offices of Sen. Bernie Moreno and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, release on their joint New York Times op-ed proposing to lift the payroll tax cap, June 23, 2026

•      ThinkAdvisor, "7 Social Security Bills Brewing in Congress," Oct. 8, 2026 (source of the Altman, Shedden, and Richtman comments)

About the author

Jeff Batson, RFC®, is a retirement income advisor with Goat Planning in Staunton, Virginia, serving clients in 20 states. A Navy veteran, he is the author of Don't Run Out: A Practical Guide to Social Security, Medicare, and Tax-Smart Retirement Income. Learn more at goatplanning.com.

This article is for educational purposes only and is not legal, tax, or financial advice. It draws on sources believed to be reliable, and any opinions are not predictive of future events. Please consult a qualified professional about your own situation. This content has not been reviewed by FINRA.