Social Security Policy and Rural Communities, with Comparisons to Urban Communities

This NCFAP study was done with funding support from the Howard G. Buffet Foundation and authored by Karl G. King, retired Partner of the accounting and consulting firm Crowe, Chizek and Company, LLP; Glenn L, Nelson, economic consultant in Ann Arbor, Michigan; and Jill Long Thompson, Chief Executive Officer (as of 2007), National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy. The results are available in the following forms.

Policy Brief

This report presents a national summary of the findings by metropolitan, micropolitan, and rural countryside communities. The paper shows the consequences of i) reducing the Social Security benefits of all beneficiaries by the same proportion, ii) reducing the upper tier of Social Security benefits only, iii) raising the Social Security retirement age, iv) increasing the share of earnings subject to Social Security taxation, and v) a synthesis that would be geographically neutral.

For a complete copy of the Policy Brief, click here.

Full Report (35 pages)

This report presents the findings by county and state as well as presents the national estimates appearing in the Policy Brief. The report analyzes the policy options noted above in the description of the Policy Brief and also, for states, presents the findings by metropolitan, micropolitan, and rural countryside communities. County results are presented in the form of U.S. maps with color coding of counties to reflect empirical results; regional consequences, for both small and large regions, are quickly apparent.

For a complete copy of the Full Report, click here.

Detailed Reports of County Results, Methods, and References

The following products of this study present considerable detail. The detailed discussion of methodology and references will be of great interest to analysts and scholars but not to most policy makers and citizens. The tables of the empirical results for counties include over 3,000 rows of estimates. Most readers will want to look at only a small fraction of the counties, e.g., those in their sub-state regions.

Detailed Methodology and References (13 pages)

Web Table 1. Total Population and Population Age 65 and Over by Rural-Urban Spectrum and County, 2005 presents information for counties analogous to that for states in Table 1 of the Full Report; the information in this table is the basis for Figure 1 in the Full Report.

Web Table 2. Population, Personal Income, and Per Capita Income by Rural-Urban Spectrum and County, 2005 presents information for counties analogous to that for states in Table 2 of the Full Report; the information in this table is the basis for Figure 2 in the Full Report.

Web Table 3. Personal Income and Social Security Retirement Benefits by Rural-Urban Spectrum and County, 2005 presents information for counties analogous to that for states in Table 3 of the Full Report; the information in this table is the basis for Figure 3 in the Full Report.

Web Table 4. Projected Reduction in Benefits for the Top Tier of Beneficiaries as a Percent of Total Personal Income by Rural-Urban Spectrum and County, 2034 presents information for counties analogous to that for states in Table 4 of the Full Report; the information in this table is the basis for Figure 4 in the Full Report.

Web Table 5. Projected Reduction in Benefits Due to Raising the Retirement Age as a Percent of Total Personal Income by Rural-Urban Spectrum and County, 2034 presents information for counties analogous to that for states in Table 5 of the Full Report; the information in this table is the basis for Figure 5 in the Full Report.

Web Table 6. OASDI and HI Taxable Income by Rural-Urban Spectrum and County, 2003 presents information for counties analogous to that for states in Table 6 of the Full Report.

Web Table 7. Estimated Increase in Social Security Taxes Due to Removing the Cap on Taxable Earnings, as a Percent of Total Personal Income by Rural-Urban Spectrum and County, 2003 presents information for counties analogous to that for states in Table 7 of the Full Report; the information in this table is the basis for Figure 6 in the Full Report.

Web Table 8a. Projected Number of Households with Incomes of $200,000 or More (in year 2000 dollars) as a Percent of Total Households by Rural-Urban Spectrum and County, 2034 presents the information that is the basis for Figure 7 in the Full Report.

Web Table 8b. Projected Increase in Social Security Taxes Due to Raising the Proportion of Earnings Taxed from 83 to 90 Percent, as a Percent of Total Personal Income by Rural-Urban Spectrum and County, 2034 presents information for counties analogous to that for states in Table 8 of the Full Report; the information in this table is the basis for Figure 8 in the Full Report.

Web Table 9. An Example of a Geographically Neutral Synthesis, Showing the Impacts of Three Policy Provisions Relative to Income by Rural-Urban Spectrum, State, and County, 2034 presents information for states and counties analogous to that for the nation in Table 9 of the Full Report; the information in this table is the basis for Web Figure 9 whose link appears below.

Web Figure 9. An Example of a Geographically Neutral Synthesis, Showing the Impacts of Three Policy Provisions Relative to Income, 2034 presents a U.S. map with color-coded counties analogous to Figures 1-8 in the Full Report. There are NO web figures 1-8. The number 9 was chosen for this figure to show its linkage to Web Table 9.