Written by 
(NewsNation) — Donald Trump vowed to end taxes on Social Security retirement benefits on the campaign trail, but as he heads into his second term that promise could be hard to keep.
“You would have to have bipartisan buy-in to do that and it’s hard for me to imagine that happening,” said Charles Blahous, a senior research strategist at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University who specializes in Social Security.
Today, individuals who earn above $25,000 pay income tax on up to 50% of their Social Security retirement benefits. For seniors who earn above $34,000, an additional 35% of benefits are taxable. Nine states also collect taxes on Social Security.
Trump pledged to end those taxes at the federal level: “Seniors should not pay taxes on Social Security, and they won’t,” he said at a July rally in Pennsylvania.
But that could be a tall order. Any changes to Social Security’s taxation structure would require 60 votes in the Senate, meaning Republicans and Democrats would have to work together to make it happen, Blahous pointed out.
Even if retirees on both sides of the aisle support Trump’s idea, there’s a major reason lawmakers are unlikely to: Social Security’s finances are in dire straits.
In roughly a decade, retirees could see their benefits slashed by 21% if Congress doesn’t take action. Ending taxes on benefits — which account for 4% of the retirement program’s income — would squeeze the program further.
In other words, Trump probably needs to propose a plan that increases revenue before lawmakers will agree to slash taxes.
A recent analysis by the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) found that Trump’s Social Security agenda — which also includes ideas like eliminating taxes on tips, imposing more tariffs and deporting unauthorized migrants — would “dramatically worsen” the program’s finances and move up the insolvency date three years, from 2034 to 2031.
Trump’s campaign slammed the CRFB analysis at the time, saying: “The so-called experts at CRFB have been consistently wrong throughout the years.”
Polling suggests most Americans are in favor of changing the payroll tax so high earners pay more into the Social Security system, which would help bolster the program’s revenue. So far, Trump hasn’t signaled that he’s open to the idea.
Will Social Security change under Trump?
Trump has repeatedly said he won’t “cut one cent” from Social Security or raise the retirement age. The official Republican Party Platform adopted at the Republican National Convention echoed those promises but it’s less clear how Trump plans to shore up the program’s finances.
Earlier this year, the Republican Study Committee’s (RSC) 2025 budget proposal suggested raising the retirement age for those not near retirement “to account for increases in life expectancy.”
Trump has pointed to economic dynamism as a potential solution and has suggested bolstering the program by tapping into “incredible wealth under our feet” in the form of oil and gas. The CRFB reported that would do little to address the shortfall.
The most likely scenario, as Blahous sees it, is that Trump’s second term will look a lot like his first, meaning few changes, if any, to Social Security.
“His standpoint has been, ‘I’m just not going to change anything’ and I think that’s a fairly likely bet,” Blahous said.
Aaron Cirksena, founder and CEO of MDRN Capital and a retirement planning specialist, thinks ending taxes on benefits would be popular if Trump can make it happen.
“To retirees, when they’re getting taxed taking Social Security payments out of the system it feels like they’re basically getting taxed twice on it,” he said.
Today, about 40% of Social Security recipients pay federal income taxes on their benefits, according to the Social Security Administration. That share has risen from 26% in 1998 because the exemption thresholds don’t go up with inflation, an example of so-called “bracket creep.”
For now, Cirksena said it’s a bad idea to shift your retirement strategy based on potential changes down the road.
“Until things are actually enacted and they’re set in stone, don’t make any hard, concrete plans,” he said.