The day after the federal “Big, Beautiful Bill” was passed by Congress, the Social Security Administration sent out this email to recipients:
Besides sounding somewhat political for a federal agency, it gave the false impression that the bill eliminated federal income tax on social security benefits:
The new law includes a provision that eliminates federal income taxes on Social Security benefits for most beneficiaries, providing relief to individuals and couples.
Before the bill passed, the Senate parliamentarian ruled that changes to social security could not be made in this type of bill and the provision to not tax social security benefits was completely removed from it.
*MOUSE PRINT:
So how can the Social Security Administration claim the new law includes such a provision? They point to another measure in the law — a new $6,000 senior deduction — that would supposedly offset the income taxes that would otherwise be due on social security earnings for most people. The deduction is applied against other income too, however. And as their income rises, the deduction decreases to zero and is completely phased out after 2028.
Many major media outlets over the weekend reported on the misrepresentation in the email from the Social Security Administration. (See stories from NBC, Washington Post, the New York Times, and CNN.)
I know, some of you will say these are liberal media outlets and are not objective. So, MrConsumer uploaded the entire SSA email to Google Gemini and Microsoft CoPilot and asked these AI services to “evaluate the veracity and factual accuracy” of that email.
Here is what each said about the key claim that the new law contained a provision eliminating income tax on social security benefits:
*MOUSE PRINT:
“The new law includes a provision that eliminates federal income taxes on Social Security benefits for most beneficiaries…”:
This statement is inaccurate in its phrasing. As noted above, the law does not eliminate the taxation of benefits, but rather provides a deduction that can lead to many beneficiaries paying no tax on their benefits due to reduced overall taxable income. —Google Gemini
Claim: “The bill eliminates federal income taxes on Social Security benefits for most beneficiaries.”
– Misleading. The bill does not change the underlying tax code that governs how Social Security benefits are taxed.
– Instead, it adds a temporary deduction that applies to all income, not just Social Security. This means the tax is still technically in place, but many seniors will owe nothing due to the deduction.
– The deduction phases out for individuals earning over $75,000 and couples over $150,000, and it expires after 2028 unless renewed. — Microsoft CoPilot
What do you think? Did the SSA email cross the line? Offer your comments below, but please do not turn this into a pro or anti Tr–p rant, or a pro or anti political party diatribe.
As is typical MousePrint has been a watchdog for consumers against the deceptions and misleading claims and potential exploits.
middle-class American guy
Yes, it was very misleading. I knew it was propaganda when I read the “Big Beautiful” phrase.
It might be wise for the administration to run their communication letters through AI themselves for inaccuracy or misleading statements- before release- if they hope to maintain some sense of reliability and respect with the public. Thank you for doing the job.
They don’t care about reliability and respect. They have a ready group of dupes that will believe anything they’re told by their demigod. A sucker born every minute, and we ALL have to pay for them. This was intentional. The Administration knows people don’t vet, and have issues with credibility
I got the email but recently I don’t believe much of what the federal government sends me. I wasn’t surprised by the double talk, very much like the letters I receive from my congressman and senators.
Yes, the whole US government has been bought by big money. It’s all lies where the senators/reps do the dog and pony shows for the finance robber barons.
This is no surprise. The Trump administration often does this kind of thing – i.e., giving a tiny benefit to some groups THAT ALWAYS EXPIRES to make these groups believe Trump is trying to help them. My understanding is that he did a similar thing (for middle income Americans) during his 1st term that also expired and was not extended. The goal is simply to get these groups to vote for the GOP in the next election. Most voters are so tuned out that they don’t even know what’s going on. And that is the BIG problem.
Totally correct.
Our income exceeds the threshold but it never showed have been taxed. This is a step in the right direction to address decades of congressmen malfeasance.
I too received this email, and upon digging found it to not be from the SSA.
When I got this email I thought it was political spam. Then realized it was from the real SSA. I was kind of shocked, but knew it was inaccurate.
I think you are being purposely obtuse.
Or as a wise person once said “the BIG print giveth, the small print taketh away”…
Thank you for pointing this out. As soon as I received that email I thought “what the ….” So I did some research as well and got the real scoop. It just goes to show you that the devil is in the details.
The SSA email states MOST not ALL SS recipients will not pay federal taxes on their benefit. [Insult edited out] you can quickly understand that this is an additional $6,000 deduction from your taxable income.
Always remember that AI answers are programmed by the same people who control the untrustworthy media.
Good point. I trust AI as much as I trust political polling, whose questions are geared to create specific replies.
There is not only this, but the Trump administration has politicized all of the Federal agencies. I’m getting email from the agencies – official Government websites – that are totally political in nature. The skew facts, just as this Social Security message does. Just another nail in the coffin of American democracy.
I have received the SSA emails for years. I work with many persons on SSDI and SSI. I have noticed a very distinct change in the SSA emails since the new president took office. SSA does not upset the apple cart and they drank the kool-aid.
MrConsumer … Liberal media? You mean the ones buying their way out of lawsuits for fear of retaliation? Other than https://freespeech.org/ there is no liberal media… Or should I say honest, truthful, factual media?
Big Brutal Deception email by an SSA likely threatened from those in charge.
I miss Paul Harvey…and now for the rest of the story. You ask not to make the article political when the article itself is indeed political. From the Social Security Administration itself:
“To examine the extent to which persons aged 65 or older rely on Social Security, we estimate the proportions of aged Americans for whom Social Security benefits account for (1) at least 50 percent and (2) at least 90 percent of their family income.1 Interestingly, the estimates are quite similar, despite design differences across the three surveys. We find that about half of the population aged 65 or older live in households that receive at least 50 percent of their family income from Social Security benefits and about 25 percent of aged households rely on Social Security benefits for at least 90 percent of their family income.”
Given the sources of income for senior citizens and how Social Security is taxed with its outside income limitations the statement of reductions of social security taxation due to the increase deduction is in fact true! The consumerist needs to be a little more transparent and honest in its analysis if it is going to make these accusations!!
https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v77n2/v77n2p1.html “The Importance of Social Security Benefits to the Income of the Aged Population
by Irena Dushi, Howard M. Iams, and Brad Trenkamp
Social Security Bulletin, Vol. 77 No. 2, 2017 (released May 2017)”
Thank you… at least one person actually evaluated the original statements in some depth. When I first heard of the “no tax on SS” the news outlet on which I heard it pointed out that there were income limitations on exclusion. Anyone who listens to, or reads, news on a site that didn’t point that out… change your sources!
The original claim was not really false (“many” or “most”) actually will not pay tax on their SS because “many” or “most” are not at the income levels that would exclude no tax. Yes, it is written in a way that many careless readers would misinterpret, if they are higher earners, but what’s new about that? And running this by AI is both embarassing and sad. I have so many friends who think AI is somehow wiser than we are. If you’re wise, it’s not wiser than you. If you’re not wise, many are wiser than you. Find someone to be close to who IS wise, in that case, who can perhaps explain things to you as Nathan has above. And yes, if you just believe and accept what you hear (whether from government, news, internet, etc.) today, you are asking for big problems in your life because misrepresentation of reality is becoming the rule, not the exception! 🙂
It was not completely accurate since it did not mention that the deductions would expire in 2028, while the tax discounts for the 1% would be in effect for something like 10 years (or longer)
I received the same email from the SSA and was just as appalled by it as you were. Putting aside its deceptiveness, the issuance of such a nakedly political memo by an ostensibly nonpartisan government agency is, as you suggest, pretty detestable.
As for its truth content or the lack thereof, this is certainly no surprise. We’ve known for some time that the world is, once again, enduring regimes that place a premium on the Big Lie. How do we expel them is the question. The solution is unclear, but here’s a suggestion; AI for President!
I am more offended by the cheerleading (political) email from a major federal agency, than by its apparently misleading description of the law. It all has the Trump administration’s fingerprints, which deserve no benefit of the doubt. Nonetheless, it sounds (if I understand it) like the actual law works primarily to the benefit of those at lower income levels–which could be viewed as a sensible, absent the distortion of pretending it applies to all.
I received that email and was horrified. It is quite misleading, as you pointed out. Just as distressing is that the various fact-check sites don’t sufficiently call it out for what it is, which is simply a run-of-the-mill tax cut for those over 65 dressed up as having something to do with Social Security.
The point is: they could just as easily claim that this new bill eliminates taxes on dividends for people 65 or older. Or capital gains. Or interest income. It’s not directly tied to any type of income source. Sure, it wouldn’t eliminate taxes on any these things in all cases. But neither does it eliminate taxes on Social Security for everyone.
It’s hogwash.
The letter in question was a shockingly political statement from an agency that is supposed to be nonpartisan. It was also, as you demonstrated, completely false.
Bill Clinton giveth the IRMAA.
It’s not too late for Donald Trump to make good on his word and to take it away.
A promise to end social security made. When will the promise be delivered?
I received this email. It was NOT “somewhat ” political. It was TOTALLY political! We are in such an awful place in this country. Deep sigh…?
The letter certainly could have been worded better, but I have to agree with Bill. The phrase “most beneficiaries” was used in one paragraph, and the phrase “90% of SS beneficiaries” was used in another. None of this was difficult to understand or buried in fine print somewhere.
Trump wanted to eliminate the tax entirely, and he *tried* to eliminate the tax entirely, but got stymied by congress.
I don’t find the letter intentionally misleading at all.
Figures this wasn’t legit. Thanks for giving a retired disabled 66 year old false hope. Something good turns to crap when you trust the government
IF I AM NOT MISTAKEN THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID THAT IT WOULD NOT BE NO TAX ON SOCIAL SECURITY, WHEN HE BECAME OUR PRESIDENT! ALONG WITH THE
ECONOMY, WHICH EVERYTHING IS OUT OF HAND NOW AND STILL STRESSING MANY MANY PEOPLE. FOOD IS OUTRAGEOUS! MEDIUM WAGE IS SO LOW HOW CAN ANYONE AFFORD ANYTHING. WHY DO YOU THINK SO MANY PEOPLE ARE NOT WORKING AND OUT PICKING FOR MORE PAY. THESE YOUNG PEOPLE WORKING FOR 7.25 HR. IS A DISGRACE CONSIDERING EVERYTHING GOUNG ON IN THIS COUNTRY. ESPECIALLY NORTH CAROLINA! AND OTHER STATES ALSO. I CALLED TO GET IN LEAP PROGRAM. THEY SAID NO FUNDS!!! I AM 68 YRS OLD AND HAVE LOW SOCIAL SECURITY PER MONTH. WAKE UP PRESIDENT TRUMP! WE SENIORS NEED HELP. WASHINGTON NC 27889
[Edited]
Your response doesn’t address the issue asked. what do you actually think about the issue at hand/
I say it was an attempt to do something. As stated in copilot to make this kind of change would require tax code to change and that wasn’t going to get done quickly. At least Trump fought to do something for our seniors. He could have done nothing like all the other administration’s have done in the past. Call it what you will, I call it a tax break.
I’m thinking it was a mistake, as it was originally part of the bill and then taken out at the last minute, I’d like to believe that they already had an announcement written up before the bill was changed and passed. But hey $6000 additional deduction won’t hurt.
When I saw this mail, I immediately assumed that it was not written by the “old” Social Security Administration. Trying to be non partisan, I will simply say that I believe the information shared was colored by entities that are not concerned with absolute facts.
For the 5 years that I have dealt with Social Security, it has been a bastion of honesty, hard working employees and prompt response to phone calls.
Now, the wait time on hold is up to 120 minutes. So, to me, it seems impossible to segregate politics from this discussion. I am concerned that this is the beginning of messages/letters that are skewed away from truth.