As we await the release of the 2026 Social Security Trustees Report, a new survey reveals that means-testing Social Security has “bipartisan supermajority support,” including among high-income respondents.
While the annual Social Security Trustees Report is expected to be released sometime in June (last year’s report was released on June 18, 2025), the most recent analysis of the financially troubled entitlement program from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected it would become insolvent in 2032 and trigger automatic benefit cuts that could amount to 24%. That means someone who receives a monthly benefits check of $2,000 would see it drop by $480 to $1,520.
The Reagan National Economic Forum Public Policy Survey, released this week by the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute, asked Americans how they think Social Security’s shortfall should be closed to prevent benefits from being cut when the program is no longer to pay out full benefits in 2032.
According to key findings from the survey, Americans want the affluent to foot the bill for entitlement reform.
“Means-testing Social Security has bipartisan supermajority support, including among high-income respondents. 71% overall, including 60% of those earning more than $200,000 per year, prefer cutting Social Security benefits for high-net-worth retirees over either raising their own taxes or cutting current retirees’ benefits across the board,” the survey’s “Key Findings” states.
“Means-testing Social Security has bipartisan supermajority support, including among high-income respondents.”
The survey shows there is widespread agreement—including among the affluent—that means testing is preferable to broad-based tax increases. When asked to choose between having their taxes increased by $1,500, having existing retiree benefits cut by $5,000, and cutting benefits to moderately high-net-worth retirees by $15,000, majorities uniformly choose the last option: 71% endorse this approach, including 75% of Democrats, 72% of independents, and 66% of Republicans. Even 60% of those currently earning more than $200,000 per year prefer this to other options.
One recent proposal from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) advocates for a “Six Figure Limit,” which would cap total annual benefits at $100,000 for a married couple and $50,000 for an individual retiring at the normal retirement age. This idea appears to be gaining traction, with recent polling showing strong public support for capping benefits for wealthier retirees before slashing payments.
When given the choice to either raise taxes or cut benefits to address the immediate shortfall, Reagan survey respondents prefer the former by a two-to-one margin and is the preferred course of action among all partisan and ideological groups. Voters ages 18 to 29, however, were in favor of reducing benefits to existing workers; voters age 45 and higher all prefer to raise taxes.
Overall, the survey found support for specific and viable policy actions—reducing benefits, increasing taxes on current workers, raising the retirement age, and simply adding to the national debt—was lukewarm. The most popular of these options, raising the retirement age, had only 26% support.
About 40% of comments in the survey propose increasing taxes on the wealthy or corporations, or lifting the Social Security tax cap (under which only the first $184,500 of an individual’s wages are subject to Social Security taxes).
Other findings included that only 17% of comments suggested the shortfall was due to mismanagement or theft, and 13% want to reduce spending on national security and defense priorities to bolster entitlements.
In an interview this week with FOX Business, Dan Rothschild, director of the Center for Civics, Education, and Opportunity at the Reagan Institute, said, “Americans fall into two different camps: those who want to do something about it and those who want to push this off to the next generation.”
He noted a significant number of people surveyed did not want to make any changes at all, apparently driven by the perception that Social Security and Medicare troubles are the result of waste, fraud and abuse—which he dismissed.
“Not that it’s a problem inherent to a pay-go-system like this,” Rothschild said. “I see a massive gap between the way that Americans understand the way that entitlement programs are funded and the way that entitlement programs are actually funded.”
SEE ALSO:
• AARP Official Stresses Need for Social Security Reform
• Social Security Trust Fund Now Projected to Run Dry in 2032: CBO
• 2025 Social Security Trustees Report Shows 23% Benefit Cut on Tap by 2033
• Six-Figure Social Security Cap Proposed to Boost Program Solvency