Bill Overview
Title: Supporting Essential Workers in Retirement Act
Description: This bill excludes premium pay earned by an essential worker during a period of the COVID-19 emergency from income limits that apply to Social Security retirement benefits.
Sponsors: Sen. Collins, Susan M. [R-ME]
Target Audience
Population: Essential workers during the COVID-19 emergency
Estimated Size: 15000000
- Essential workers include workers in healthcare, public safety, food production and distribution, transportation, and other sectors crucial during the COVID-19 pandemic.
- Premium pay was provided to incentivize continued work in essential roles during the COVID-19 pandemic.
- Social Security retirement benefits have specific income thresholds that determine taxation and benefit reductions.
- The bill appears to provide a benefit by excluding premium pay from income that might otherwise reduce Social Security benefits.
Reasoning
- First, the target population is essential workers who earned premium pay during COVID-19, nearing retirement or already retired.
- Not everyone who was an essential worker might benefit; many retired workers might not have reached income penalty thresholds.
- Cultural and regional differences mean some areas have more essential workers, affecting commonness across interviews.
- Cost and budget limit number impacted; thus, focus on representing a sample with varying impacts of the policy.
Simulated Interviews
Nurse (New York, NY)
Age: 64 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I really hope this policy passes, as it would make my retirement plans much more feasible.
- Excluding the premium pay from the income limits would relieve a lot of stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Grocery Store Manager (Houston, TX)
Age: 67 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Since retiring, I've been worried about how my extra income affects my Social Security.
- This policy could provide some relief.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 2 |
Public Transportation Driver (Detroit, MI)
Age: 59 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any policy that helps me receive full Social Security is a welcome change.
- It feels like a small reward for the risks we took.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 2 |
Grocery Cashier (Seattle, WA)
Age: 70 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's been tough seeing my Social Security affected by money I earned at great personal risk.
- This policy would ease my financial situation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 2 |
Firefighter (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this policy passes, it would let me retire comfortably.
- I wouldn't have to worry about maximizing my retirement benefits with the Social Security adjustments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Hospital Janitor (Miami, FL)
Age: 68 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I could use every bit of help this policy brings.
- Not having the premium pay count against me would reduce my anxiety.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 2 |
Food Distribution Worker (Chicago, IL)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having fewer deductions from my Social Security would make retiring a lot less stressful.
- This policy brings some fairness back to our contributions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Hospital Administrative Staff (New Orleans, LA)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Financial planning for retirement is uncertain, but if this bill passes, it eases my worries.
- It could significantly impact my quality of life post-retirement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 2 |
Delivery Driver (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy would be a form of recognition for the effort during the pandemic.
- Reducing the financial penalties allows for a more dignified retirement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 2 |
Pharmacy Technician (Columbus, OH)
Age: 69 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a relief to think I might keep more of my Social Security benefits.
- This policy could help smooth over the rough patches.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $100000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $125000000)
Year 2: $105000000 (Low: $77500000, High: $130000000)
Year 3: $110000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $135000000)
Year 5: $120000000 (Low: $85000000, High: $145000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The extent to which essential workers received and benefited from premium pay varies widely across sectors and states.
- The ability of Social Security Administration systems to accurately implement the exclusion of premium pay from income limits efficiently.
- Potential debate on whether adjustments might be applicable to other forms of income for Social Security calculations.