Why it Matters

A new Congressional Research Service report published April 6, 2026 finds that Social Security low earners are increasingly underserved by the program's existing protections, with one key safeguard nearly obsolete.

The report, drawing on data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), a nationally representative longitudinal survey of Americans over age 50 linked with Social Security Administration records, profiles workers born between 1940 and 1959 and examines how the program's structure affects their retirement income. The findings arrive as Congress faces mounting pressure to address Social Security's long-term finances.

The Special Minimum Benefit: A Protection in Name Only

The Social Security earnings analysis at the center of the CRS report Social Security 2026 document centers on a little-discussed provision: the Special Minimum Benefit, a formula designed to give workers with many years of low earnings a higher monthly payment than the standard calculation would produce.

The problem, according to the report, is that the provision has been indexed to prices rather than wages. Because wages have historically grown faster than prices, the Special Minimum Benefit has lost ground over time — and is now, for practical purposes, nearly irrelevant.

As of December 2024, only 19,872 beneficiaries were receiving the Special Minimum Benefit. The report describes this as the result of a structural design flaw that has compounded over decades, not a sudden policy shift.

The implications are direct: workers who spent long careers in consistently low-wage jobs — the exact population the provision was meant to protect — are increasingly falling through a gap that the law technically still covers.

Who Are Lifetime Low Earners?

The report is careful to distinguish between workers who experience temporarily low earnings — students, those briefly out of the workforce — and those with lifetime low income Social Security benefits trajectories: workers with long, consistent records of low wages.

According to the HRS data cited in the report, this population skews heavily toward women, racial and ethnic minorities, and individuals with lower levels of educational attainment. Many worked intermittently, in part-time roles, or in industries with historically depressed wages.

For these workers, Social Security represents a significantly larger share of total retirement income compared to higher earners. That concentration makes them particularly exposed to any structural changes in how benefits are calculated or indexed.

The report also flags the 35-year earnings averaging rule — the formula that calculates benefits based on a worker's top 35 years of covered earnings — as a structural disadvantage for this group. Workers with many zero-earning or low-earning years see those years pull down their benefit calculation, even if they worked consistently throughout their careers.

What the Data Shows About Retirement Income Adequacy

The Health and Retirement Study HRS data allows the CRS to track actual earnings histories and retirement-age income in ways that aggregate statistics often obscure. The picture that emerges for lifetime low earners is one of compounded vulnerability.

Because these workers typically lack significant private savings, defined-benefit pensions, or other retirement assets, Social Security is not a supplement — it is often the primary or sole source of income in older age. The report's retirement benefits low wage workers analysis shows that this dependence makes even modest benefit reductions — whether through formula changes, indexing shifts, or retirement age adjustments — disproportionately consequential for this population.

Congressional and Administrative Implications

A Problem That Crosses Party Lines

The near-obsolescence of the Special Minimum Benefit is, by the report's framing, a documented policy failure rather than a partisan flashpoint. Both parties have historically expressed support for protecting low-wage workers in retirement, and the report provides a concrete data foundation for that conversation.

One bill already in play: H.R. 1700, the Social Security Expansion Act, introduced in the 119th Congress, includes a provision to increase the minimum benefit for lifetime low earners based on years in the workforce. The CRS report does not evaluate the bill's prospects or endorse it, but its findings provide direct empirical context for that kind of legislative proposal.

The Indexing Debate Has Real Stakes

The report's findings carry a pointed cautionary note for the broader Social Security reform debate: price indexing of the Special Minimum Benefit has already rendered it nearly ineffective. That documented outcome is a data point policymakers will need to reckon with if proposals to apply price indexing more broadly to Social Security benefits gain traction.

Social Security Low Earners in the Context of Fiscal Reform

The Trump Administration has pledged not to cut Social Security benefits, but the report's findings complicate what "cuts" means in practice. Structural changes — adjusting the benefit formula, modifying the 35-year averaging rule, or raising the retirement age — would not be labeled as benefit cuts in most legislative language, but the report makes clear they would fall hardest on lifetime low earners.

With the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund projected to face depletion in the early 2030s, some form of reform is widely viewed as inevitable. The CRS report's Social Security earnings analysis provides a detailed accounting of who bears the most risk in that process.

What Congress Faces

The report does not prescribe a legislative path, but it outlines two reform options that directly address the documented gaps: re-indexing the Special Minimum Benefit to wages rather than prices, and modifying the 35-year earnings averaging formula to reduce the penalty on workers with intermittent or low-earning years.

Neither option comes without cost, and the report does not score them fiscally. But it establishes the underlying data case: the current system's protections for the lowest-earning workers are eroding, and the population most affected has the least capacity to absorb that erosion.

For a Congress that will eventually have to vote on Social Security's future, this report offers a granular look at what's already happening before any formal changes are made.

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article