Adler Firm, PLLC
Free Consultation - Call 24/7

Changes to Social Security Benefits May Have Unintended Consequences

As the government seeks to reign in federal spending, Social Security is often a focal point of the discussion. It is among the most costly federal programs and many have noted that trimming the costs of this program could go a long way toward addressing the overall federal deficit. However, the best means of reducing the costs of the program are hotly contested.

Some have suggested that the best way to reduce costs would be to raise the age of eligibility for retirement benefits. Currently, Social Security retirement benefits are available to those who are 62 or older and meet the income requirements.

Under a draft proposal released by the Obama administration, the retirement age may be increased in accordance with longevity expectations. The plan suggests that the retirement age would be raised to 67 by 2050 and 69 by 2075. Clearly, by raising the age at which individuals become eligible for retirement benefits, the number of people eligible would go down.

Raising Social Security Retirement Age May Increase SSDI Applications

However, it is important to remember that actions can have unintended consequences. Increasing the retirement age may not result in the cost savings anticipated. In fact, some experts suggest it may simply result in more people applying for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits. Eligibility for SSDI benefits is based upon work history rather than age. According to the General Accountability Office, the increase in disability costs may exceed the savings gained from delaying retirement for future generations.

Given the current deficit and the challenging economic times, it is understandable that the federal government is seeking to reduce costs. However, decisions must be made carefully and should not be made at the expense of senior citizens. For more information regarding Social Security benefits, speak with a knowledgeable attorney.

Related Story:

Retirement Delayed: Baby Boomers Worry About Benefit Cuts

1 Comment

GAO is now of the opinion that "billions" of dollars of SSDI payments are being shifted over from denial of WC benefits. Does this seem plausible to you? If a person had a clearcut disability caused by work, why wouldnt they pursue WC because the benefit is generally higher than SSDI?


Leave a comment
Comment Information
Request A Free Consultation

Representing Michigan injured workers since 1979.

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.


Privacy Policy

Traverse City Office
13561 S West Bay Shore Drive
Suite 301
Traverse City, MI 49684

Toll Free: 888-873-7173
Fax: 231-943-2299
Map & Directions

Farmington Hills Office
30300 Northwestern Highway
Suite 304
Farmington Hills, MI 48334

Map & Directions

Adler Firm, PLLC