So said Janemarie Mulvey last September in a Congressional Research Service report at senate.gov, here:
Thus, supporters of changing the base argue that raising or eliminating the base not only would be more fair, but also that Social Security’s projected long-range financing problems could be substantially alleviated or, alternatively, that the payroll tax rate could be reduced without causing a loss of revenue to the system. It is estimated that almost $100 billion in revenue to the Social Security program would be generated annually by taxing all earnings, and if such revenues were not used to lower the tax rate, they would reduce the government’s outstanding debt and eliminate about 95% of Social Security’s long-range deficit.
So, my back of the envelope number is $50 billion higher than hers.
Hers is still bigger than my mortgage deduction "loophole"!
