You're eager to

Millions of Americans may have an experience like this in the future, only with something far more important. The shrunken candy bar will be their Social Security checks. Benefits will be far smaller than expected if Social Security is "reformed." The change would come through a bill submitted by Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Plano.

Texas congressman Sam Johnson is shown at the Vietnam War Commemoration 50th anniversary program and luncheon for Vietnam veterans at the Frontiers of Flight Museum last March. (Robert W. Hart / Special Contributor)

You would not know this from his news release. It bears a modest title: "Sam Johnson Unveils Plan to Permanently Save Social Security." The release describes a series of proposed changes that would make Social Security solvent for 75 years.

This is huge. The 2016 Trustees' report estimates that the trust fund will be exhausted by 2034. Worse, the actuarial deficit over the next 75 years is a whopping 2.66 percent of taxable payroll. Since the employment tax is 12.4 percent, that's a huge amount. Measured another way; the unfunded liability amounts to $11.4 trillion. Today.

That $11.4 trillion is not on hand. And that's the candy bar dilemma. The only way to deliver the promised benefits is to increase the tax. The alternative is to shrink the candy bar. That means finding a way to weasel out on promised benefits while continuing to collect the same amount in taxes. Future retirees will pay the same high tax but receive less in benefits.

What a deal.

Cuts to future benefits are not mentioned in the press news release. Nor are they mentioned in a supporting document provided by Johnson's office. In the glorious tradition of misleading language from our elected leaders, the releases tell us that Johnson call for:

Actuarial truth

But the truth comes from Stephen C. Goss, the chief actuary for Social Security. A 30-page letter from his office provides an item-by-item analysis of the proposed bill. It also gives estimates of how future retiree benefits will compare to those due under current law. Here's my CliffsNotes summary.

The Social Security Reform Act of 2016 proposes 15 changes in Social Security. Of those, 10 have impacts under 0.10 percent of funding. Many are considered "negligible." The big bucks are in three proposals. One works to change the benefit formula. Another advances the full retirement age. The third changes the method for calculating inflation. Those changes would cut benefits by 2.94 percent of payroll over the next 75 years.

The changes would have no immediate effect. But they would start to bite for workers retiring in 2030 or later. That means workers who are 50 or younger. So if you're already retired, you're safe. But your adult children and grandchildren will see their benefits reduced. Meanwhile, they will continue to pay employment taxes that support current retirees.

Level of earnings

Future retiree benefit cuts depend on their level of lifetime earnings. Here are examples for medium- and higher-wage workers retiring in 2030. (Low-wage workers are affected in another way, which I will cover next week.)

Benefit cuts increase each year after 2030. A 33-year-old medium-wage worker today would experience a benefit cut of 33.2 percent when retiring in 2050. That cut would increase to 34.1 percent by the time he or she reached age 95.

Bottom line: This would be a good time to make certain that your members of Congress read more than press releases. The chief actuaries' letter is a good start.

Scott Burns is a syndicated columnist and a principal of the Plano-based investment firm AssetBuilder Inc. Email questions to scott@scottburns.com.

Twitter: @assetbuilder