The White House is floating a possible payroll tax cut in conversations with lawmakers as part of a broader economic response to a coronavirus pandemic that has already sickened more than 1,000 Americans and prompted experts to sound alarms about a possible recession.

But analysts are warning that such a measure – though it would temporarily cut tax obligations for workers and businesses – would mean little to low-wage workers and unemployed Americans and could further erode the financial footing of entitlement programs such as Social Security.

"While the economy will need a boost to limit the extent of the downturn caused by the virus, cutting the Social Security tax is the wrong way to go," Dean Baker, senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, said in a statement on Tuesday.

Reports surfaced on Tuesday that President Donald Trump had pitched Republican lawmakers on implementing a 0% payroll tax rate at least through the end of the year – and possibly permanently. National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow confirmed that such discussions are underway, cautioning that the administration is "working out details right now" but that the payroll tax element is "probably the most important, powerful piece" to the White House's desired economic stimulus.

Such a policy would theoretically slash tax obligations for employees and employers. The vast majority of U.S. workers have 6.2% of the first $137,700 they earn in a given year withheld from their paychecks as part of a broader group of Federal Insurance Contributions Act taxes that includes separate funding for Medicare.

Employers collect that total and are obligated to remit it and a matching 6.2% contribution to the federal government. Those funds are then credited to employees to help pay their Social Security benefits. But the Trump administration is proposing zeroing out that Social Security tax through the rest of the year.

According to the Tax Foundation , such a payroll tax policy would cost the government more than $900 billion to implement from April through December – which could pull resources away from Social Security or, if the administration decides to redirect other tax revenues to make up for the payroll tax holiday, strain other programs or deepen federal deficits.

"Such a cut would reduce the revenue available to the Social Security program, which would almost surely result in a transfer to that program from general tax revenue," Michael Strain, a scholar and director of economic policy studies at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute, wrote in an op-ed on Wednesday. "Undermining this fiscal discipline would threaten the public's understanding of the program – that they pay into a pension plan while working, and draw benefits when retired – and invite other budget mischief in the future."

The cut would also mean little to low-wage hourly workers and unemployed Americans who don't collect a paycheck. The White House has stressed that it is working on an economic response that would support hourly workers who may not have access to paid leave. But critics have cast the proposed cut as business-friendly but not necessarily or immediately helpful to consumers.

Analysts have also criticized timing as an issue, both from relief and legislative standpoints. Any additional income Americans and corporations receive would come gradually during each pay period. Given the current scale of the outbreak, there is concern that the slow-drip nature of the policy wouldn't do much for consumers and employers who are facing immediate virus repercussions.

"Moreover, a payroll tax cut does not assist those who help to minimize the public health risk by staying at home rather than reporting to work during the epidemic," a team of experts at the conservative Heritage Foundation said in a statement on Wednesday, suggesting that "a payroll tax cut is the type of tool that might address a recession, so it is probably not the best tool to use to combat a pandemic."

The political capital to push such a policy through Capitol Hill is also expected to be significant, among Democrats and budget-conscious Republicans. Such legislative discussions are likely to take time that some experts suggest the U.S. economy may not have to receive stimulus.

"I'm actually of the view that it will have a fairly substantial impact. The problem is that it may take awhile to get enacted," Thomas Tzitzouris, director and head of fixed income research at Stretegas, said Tuesday during an appearance on CNBC's " Capital Connection ." "The real problem, in my opinion, is that it just may take so long to become enacted that, by the time it does, we may have already seen peak infection and we may have already gotten to a point where, essentially, recession is inevitable."

Kudlow acknowledged on Tuesday that the White House can extend paid sick leave and support particularly distressed sectors through executive order. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Wednesday announced the administration plans to extend America's April 15 tax deadline.

But adjustments to the tax code will need legislative approval, and Democrats' control of the House means the Trump administration will not be able to push a support package – beyond the more than $8 billion emergency funding that lawmakers approved last week – without compromising with Democrats.

"In light of reports that the Trump administration is considering new tax cuts for major corporations impacted by the coronavirus, we are demanding that the administration prioritize the health and safety of American workers and their families over corporate interests," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said in a joint statement over the weekend, expressing their support for paid sick leave and enhanced unemployment insurance, food security and affordable treatment policies.

Pelosi is among several Democrats who previously supported a more modest temporary payroll tax adjustment enacted by former President Barack Obama as part of a 2010 economic stimulus package. Under Obama, payroll tax obligations were temporarily lowered from 6.2% to 4.2%. Experts have warned that Trump's cut would be a significantly bigger lift.