Wall Street Journal editorial board hits Marshall for backing Social Security tax increase

The Wall Street Journal editorial board on Thursday took GOP Sen. Roger Marshall (Kan.) to task for backing an elimination of the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes.

Marshall, the Journal editorial board wrote , is in “favor of what would be one of the largest peacetime tax increases in recent decades” by advocating for the federal government to scrap the cap.

The maximum amount of yearly earnings on which taxpayers must hand over a portion of their paycheck to fund Social Security is $184,500. The Social Security Administration raises the cap on an annual basis to “keep pace with increases in average wages,” according to its website .

During a debate Wednesday against Adam Hamilton, his Democratic opponent in the Senate race in Kansas, Marshall said he supports eliminating the cap “altogether.” The Kansas Republican deflected on raising the retirement age, saying lawmakers could “exhaust” other options first.

“It will take Republicans and Democrats working together,” Marshall said. “There’s no easy answer, because we have more people retiring than entering the workforce.”

Hamilton, a Methodist pastor, said he supported raising the cap instead of “taking it away entirely.” The Democratic nominee said he would “look at” raising the retirement age but did not commit to supporting such a move.

The Journal editorial board blasted the proposed elimination of the cap as a “bad idea,” saying Marshall effectively supports a larger tax increase than his Democratic opponent.

“Raising or eliminating that cap has become Democrats’ go-to Social Security plan because it looks like a way to tax the rich to give to the elderly poor,” the editorial board wrote. “Never mind that under the most optimistic assumptions, eliminating the cap wouldn’t come close to filling the entitlement’s funding gap.”

The board added, “Why vote for Republicans if all you’ll get is left-wing, tax-and-spend economic policies masquerading as right-wing populism?”

Trump administration officials warned earlier this year that Social Security’s Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund will only be able to cover 78 percent of benefits starting in the early 2030s.

That has spurred lawmakers to propose multiple ideas for how to address the impending funding shortfall , including an increase or elimination of the payroll cap and the federal government investing in the stock market to increase revenue for the program.

The Journal editorial board noted that reforming payroll taxes “may be part of a Social Security fix” down the road.

“But adjustments to the retirement age, changes to cost-of-living adjustments, and means-testing benefits all need to be on the table, too,” the board argued.