Social Security: Two Types of Benefits To Be Paid This Week
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
This week, two payments will be made by the Social Security Administration (SSA).
What To Know
Millions of Americans receive Social Security benefits, whether it be retirement checks or disability payments, known as Supplemental Security Income (SSI).
On Friday, August 1, checks will go out for SSI recipients, retirees who have been collecting checks since before May 1997, and retirees who also collect SSI benefits.
Following on the from this, further payments will be made on
Wednesday, August 13 : Retirement, spousal and survivor benefits for those born between the 1st and 10th of any calendar month
: Retirement, spousal and survivor benefits for those born between the 1st and 10th of any calendar month Wednesday, August 20 : Benefits for those born between the 11th and 20th
: Benefits for those born between the 11th and 20th Wednesday, August 27 : Benefits for those with birthdays between the 21st and 31st
: Benefits for those with birthdays between the 21st and 31st Friday, August 29: SSI payments. This payment would usually come at the first of the month for September. However, due to September 1 falling on Labor Day, a national holiday, the payment will be made slightly earlier.
Stock image/file photo: A Social Security card with U.S. Dollars.
Stock image/file photo: A Social Security card with U.S. Dollars.
GETTY
How Much Can I Get?
The average Social Security check was $2,002.39 as of May 2025, although numerous seniors have expressed dissatisfaction about the amount they get.
"The average Social Security benefit amount changes monthly," an agency spokesperson told Newsweek. "As wages tend to rise over time, each new group of retirees raises the average benefit amount, since their benefit calculations typically reflect higher earnings."
Social Security benefits vary by individual. Payments are calculated based on a person's 35 highest-earning years—adjusted for inflation—and the age at which they begin claiming benefits.
In 2025, the maximum monthly benefit for someone retiring at the full retirement age of 67 is $4,018. Retiring early at 62 reduces the maximum to $2,831, while delaying retirement until 70 raises the potential benefit to as much as $5,108 per month.
SSI recipients received an average of $718.30. How much beneficiaries get is based on how much money they earn and other resources available to them.
Seniors on Social Security
With more than 50 million Americans collecting retirement checks from the federal government every month, many seniors want to see major reform to the program, according to a new report by The Senior Citizen's League.
The advocacy group found that only 10 percent of beneficiaries are satisfied with their monthly check, while 63 percent reported being dissatisfied.
Beneficiaries have also taken issue with the annual cost of living adjustment, or COLA, with many saying it doesn't accurately reflect cost increases year-to-year for older Americans. In a recent poll, 34 percent of respondents identified updating the COLA formula as their top policy priority for enhancing Social Security benefits.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
6 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump fired America's economic data collector. History shows the perils.
There is the case of China, where earlier this century local authorities manipulated data to hit growth targets mandated by Beijing, forcing analysts and policymakers to turn to alternative measures to gauge the state of the country's economy. Advertisement Perhaps most famously, there is the case of Argentina, which in the 2000s and 2010s systematically understated inflation figures to such a degree that the international community eventually stopped relying on the government's data. That loss of faith drove up the country's borrowing costs, worsening a debt crisis that ultimately led to it defaulting on its international obligations. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up It is too soon to know whether the United States is on a similar path. But economists and other experts said that Trump's decision Friday to fire Erika McEntarfer, the Senate-confirmed head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, was a troubling step in that direction. Janet Yellen, the former Treasury secretary and chair of the Federal Reserve, said the firing was not what is expected from the most advanced economy in the world. Advertisement 'This is the kind of thing you would only expect to see in a banana republic,' Yellen said. Essential data The Bureau of Labor Statistics is officially part of the Labor Department, whose secretary is a member of the president's Cabinet. But the agency operates independently, producing detailed, nonpartisan data on employment, prices, wages and other topics. Economists say that reliable, independently produced statistics are critical to good decision making in both the public and private sector. Officials at the Federal Reserve rely on government-collected data on inflation and unemployment to decide how to set interest rates, which affect how much Americans must pay to get a mortgage or a car loan. 'Good data helps not just the Fed, it helps the government, but it also helps the private sector,' Jerome Powell, the Fed chair, said at a recent news conference. 'The United States has been a leader in that for 100 years,' he added, 'and we really need to continue that in my view.' Experts on government statistics say data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and other agencies is unlikely to deteriorate dramatically overnight. The acting commissioner named to replace McEntarfer on a temporary basis, William J. Wiatrowski, is a longtime employee of the agency who is widely respected by experts inside and outside government. The career employees who collect and analyze the data remain in place, using the same methods and procedures they used before McEntarfer was pushed out. But experts who just days ago were defending the integrity of the statistical agencies now find themselves asking uncomfortable questions about the trajectory of economic data in the United States. Advertisement 'If the poverty numbers come in and look great, is the director of the Census going to get a raise?' said Amy O'Hara, a former Census Bureau official who is now a professor at Georgetown University. 'If the household income numbers don't look great what happens then? What about GDP? What about CPI?' Andreas Georgiou knows the challenges of standing up to such political pressure. After he took over Greece's statistical agency in 2010, he found that the country has been severely understating its budget deficits. Those findings ran afoul of Greek authorities, who spent years trying to prosecute him on a variety of charges related to his work, despite independent reviews that supported his conclusions. (He fared better, though, than Olimpiy Kvitkin, a Soviet census official who was arrested and executed when his population count came in lower than Josef Stalin had announced.) Georgiou refused to bend. Reliable statistics are important for policymaking, he said. But they are also essential to democracy. 'Official statistics, government statistics are a mirror that society holds up to itself,' he said. If that mirror is distorted, or broken entirely, then the accountability that is central to a democratic system cannot work. 'If society cannot see itself clearly, then it cannot identify its problems,' he said. 'If it cannot identify its problems, then it cannot find the right solutions. It cannot find the right persons to solve these problems.' Data integrity at risk Trump said he fired McEntarfer because the numbers produced by her agency were 'rigged' to hurt him politically. Experts on the government statistics, including former commissioners in both Democratic and Republican administrations, have called foul on that accusation. The commissioner, who is the bureau's sole political appointee, does not control the numbers that the agency publishes, or even see them until they have been finalized by a staff of career technocrats whose careers typically span multiple presidential administrations. Advertisement Erica Groshen, who led the bureau under President Barack Obama, recalled getting resistance from the agency's staff when she tried to liven up the language of the monthly jobs reports. The bureau's staff insisted that the agency's job wasn't to say whether the glass was half-full or half-empty, only to report that, 'It is an eight-ounce container with four ounces of liquid.' Groshen relented. That is not to say political interference would be impossible. Government statistics rely on hundreds of methodological decisions, many of them judgment calls with no obviously correct answer. A sufficiently sophisticated agency head might, over time, be able to nudge the data in a politically advantageous direction, without any single decision being so egregious that it led to a mass resignation of career employees. 'I could imagine a new commissioner coming in and trying to make changes to those methods and procedures that try to move those numbers one way or the other,' said Katharine G. Abraham, who led the bureau during the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. 'They would have to know a lot in terms of where to put the finger on the scale.' Private alternatives There are also blunter approaches. In Argentina in 2007, the government of then-President Néstor Kirchner pushed out the mathematician in charge of the country's consumer price data, then released an inflation figure that was dramatically lower than the one the mathematician had calculated. The public wasn't fooled. Nor were international bond investors, who ultimately turned to alternative sources of inflation data, calculated by researchers outside the government. Advertisement But such alternative sources are inherently limited, said Alberto Cavallo, a Harvard University economist who developed one of the most widely used private inflation indexes in Argentina. 'Private alternatives can complement official statistics, but they are not a substitute,' Cavallo wrote in an email. 'Government agencies have the resources and scale to conduct nationwide surveys -- something no private initiative can fully replicate.' Recently, Cavallo has been publishing data on consumer prices in the United States, which has shown the impact of Trump's tariffs more quickly than the government's data. But while such real-time sources are valuable, they don't carry the 'institutional credibility' of government data. The trouble is that once that credibility is eroded, it is hard to repair -- particularly at a time when partisans on both sides of the political aisle are skeptical of numbers put out by members of the opposing party. Nancy Potok, a former Census official who served as chief statistician of the United States during the first Trump administration, said that in the past there had been strong bipartisan support for the statistical system in Congress and the business community. But partisanship seems to have eroded that support at a moment when a combination of political pressures and long-standing budget challenges are making it most necessary. 'There were some people who really understood the value of the economic data, and now that's not the conversation and those champions aren't there that were there in the past,' she said. 'There's no one leading the charge to make these kind of investments.' This article originally appeared in Advertisement
Miami Herald
2 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Dave Ramsey has blunt words on Medicare, Medicaid
As Americans prepare for retirement, they often weigh a variety of financial factors - ranging from Social Security benefits to income sources such as 401(k) plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs). One crucial area that deserves attention is health care planning. For many, this means navigating the complex systems of Medicare and Medicaid. In an effort to make these topics more approachable, personal finance expert Dave Ramsey offers guidance that breaks down the basics of Medicare and Medicaid, helping individuals build a solid understanding of how these programs work. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Ramsey acknowledges that the details around Medicare and Medicaid are complicated. "Have you seen that meme with the lady's face covered in math equations looking confused?" he asked. "We're willing to bet that might sum up how you feel right now - because that's how pretty much everyone feels after looking into Medicare." "But it's not hopeless," Ramsey added. Related: Dave Ramsey sends strong message to Americans on Medicare Understanding Medicare is essential for anyone approaching retirement, Ramsey emphasizes. Medicare is a federal health insurance program for people 65 and older, or younger individuals with certain disabilities or diseases. It's divided into several parts: Medicare Part A covers hospital Part B covers medical C (Medicare Advantage) combines A, B, and often D through private Part D covers prescription drugs. Parts A and B together form Original Medicare, which offers more flexibility. Many people either choose Original Medicare with Part D and a Medigap policy, or go with a Medicare Advantage Plan, which limits provider networks. Ramsey also stresses the importance of knowing the Medicare enrollment periods. There are five: The Initial Enrollment Period (IEP) begins three months before one's 65th birthday and lasts seven months. One can enroll in Parts A and B, then add Part D or Medicare Special Enrollment Period (SEP) applies if a person had coverage through work, lived abroad, or experienced other qualifying General Enrollment Period (GEP) runs Jan. 1 to March 31. If the IEP or SEP is missed, one can enroll here, but lifetime penalties are to be Annual Enrollment Period (AEP) is from Oct. 15 to Dec. 7. This is for making changes to existing coverage, not first-time Medigap Open Enrollment Period starts the month one enrolls in Part B and lasts six months. Ramsey advises buying during this window to avoid denial or higher costs due to preexisting conditions. Ramsey advises Americans not to procrastinate and to talk with experts about the best Medicare options depending on a person's individual circumstances. More on personal finance: Dave Ramsey warns Americans on Social SecurityJean Chatzky sends strong message on major 401(k) changesFinance expert has blunt words for car buyers Related: Secretary Bessent's Social Security remarks spark AARP outcry Dave Ramsey explains that Medicaid is a joint federal and state assistance program designed to help Americans with limited income afford essential health care. Unlike Medicare, Medicaid isn't insurance, Ramsey clarified. It's more of a support system that helps cover costs such as nursing home care, personal assistance, and even Medicare premiums for those who qualify. Because states help administer Medicaid, the program varies depending on where one lives. Eligibility requirements differ by state, though they're always based on income. Ramsey notes that while the Affordable Care Act aimed to expand eligibility to anyone earning below 138% of the federal poverty level, states still have the choice to opt in or out of that expansion. To ensure consistency, the federal government mandates a minimum set of benefits that all states must provide. These include hospital services, physician visits, lab work, nursing facility care, and transportation to medical appointments. States can also offer optional benefits such as dental, vision, physical therapy, and hospice care. Ramsey emphasizes that Medicaid typically doesn't require premiums, but some states do impose small copayments for certain services. Eligibility is determined by income and assets, including wages, pensions, Social Security, veterans' benefits, and withdrawals from retirement accounts. Each state sets its own thresholds, so Ramsey emphasizes the fact that it's important to check one's local guidelines. Related: Dave Ramsey has blunt words for Americans buying a car The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Miami Herald
2 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Tariffs are making money. That may make them hard to quit.
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump's extensive tariffs have already started to generate a significant amount of money for the federal government, a new source of revenue for a heavily indebted nation that American policymakers may start to rely on. As part of his quest to reorder the global trading system, Trump has imposed steep tariffs on America's trading partners, with the bulk of those set to go into effect Thursday. Even before the latest tariffs kick in, revenue from taxes collected on imported goods has grown dramatically so far this year. Customs duties, along with some excise taxes, generated $152 billion through July, roughly double the $78 billion netted over the same time period last fiscal year, according to Treasury data. Indeed, Trump has routinely cited the tariff revenue as evidence that his trade approach, which has sown uncertainty and begun to increase prices for consumers, is a win for the United States. Members of his administration have argued that the money from the tariffs would help plug the hole created by the broad tax cuts Congress passed last month, which are expected to cost the government at least $3.4 trillion. 'The good news is that Tariffs are bringing Billions of Dollars into the USA!' Trump said on social media shortly after a weak jobs report showed signs of strain in the labor market. Over time, analysts expect that the tariffs, if left in place, could be worth more than $2 trillion in additional revenue over the next decade. Economists overwhelmingly hope that doesn't happen and the United States abandons the new trade barriers. But some acknowledge that such a substantial stream of revenue could end up being hard to quit. 'I think this is addictive,' said Joao Gomes, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School. 'I think a source of revenue is very hard to turn away from when the debt and deficit are what they are.' Trump has long fantasized about replacing taxes on income with tariffs. He often refers fondly to American fiscal policy in the late 19th century, when there was no income tax and the government relied on tariffs, citing that as a model for the future. And while income and payroll taxes remain by far the most important sources of government revenue, the combination of Trump's tariffs and the latest Republican tax cut does, on the margin, move the United States away from taxing earnings and toward taxing goods. Such a shift is expected to be regressive, meaning that rich Americans will fare better than poorer Americans under the change. That's because cutting taxes on income does, in general, provide the biggest benefit to richer Americans who earn the most income. The recent Republican cut to income taxes and the social safety net is perhaps the most regressive piece of major legislation in decades. Placing new taxes on imported products, however, is expected to raise the cost of everyday goods. Lower-income Americans spend more of their earnings on those more expensive goods, meaning the tariffs amount to a larger tax increase for them compared with richer Americans. Tariffs have begun to bleed into consumer prices, with many companies saying they will have to start raising prices as a result of added costs. And analysts expect the tariffs to weigh on the performance of the economy overall, which in turn could reduce the amount of traditional income tax revenue the government collects every year. 'Is there a better way to raise that amount of revenue? The economic answer is: Yes, there is a better way, there are more efficient ways,' said Ernie Tedeschi, director of economics at the Yale Budget Lab and a former Biden administration official. 'But it's really a political question.' Tedeschi said that future leaders in Washington, whether Republican or Democrat, may be hesitant to roll back the tariffs if that would mean a further addition to the federal debt load, which is already raising alarms on Wall Street. And replacing the tariff revenue with another type of tax increase would require Congress to act, while the tariffs would be a legacy decision made by a previous president. 'Congress may not be excited about taking such a politically risky vote when they didn't have to vote on tariffs in the first place,' Tedeschi said. Some in Washington are already starting to think about how they could spend the tariff revenue. Trump recently floated the possibility of sending Americans a cash rebate for the tariffs, and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., recently introduced legislation to send $600 to many Americans. 'We have so much money coming in, we're thinking about a little rebate, but the big thing we want to do is pay down debt,' Trump said last month of the tariffs. Democrats, once they return to power, may face a similar temptation to use the tariff revenue to fund a new social program, especially if raising taxes in Congress proves as challenging as it has in the past. As it is, Democrats have been divided over tariffs. Maintaining the status quo may be an easier political option than changing trade policy. 'That's a hefty chunk of change,' Tyson Brody, a Democratic strategist, said of the tariffs. 'The way that Democrats are starting to think about it is not that 'these will be impossible to withdraw.' It's: 'Oh, look, there's now going to be a large pot of money to use and reprogram.'' Of course, the tariffs could prove unpopular, and future elected officials may want to take steps that could lower consumer prices. At the same time, the amount of revenue the tariffs generate could decline over time if companies do, in fact, end up bringing back more of their operations to the United States, reducing the number of goods that face the import tax. 'This is clearly not an efficient way to gather revenue,' said Alex Jacquez, a former Biden official and the chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, a liberal group. 'And I don't think it would be a long-term progressive priority as a way to simply collect revenue.' This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Copyright 2025
