Introduction
CNBC’s recent article highlights new projections from the Social Security and Medicare trustees, stating both programs may deplete their trust funds earlier than previously expected. The growing concern prompted a DBUNK reader to ask whether the federal government is delaying action intentionally, potentially using an impending crisis to justify cuts disguised as “reform.” We fact-checked the article’s primary claims, checked them against official records, and examined whether key context is missing that might affect how this story is interpreted.
Historical Context
Social Security and Medicare were established during the 20th century to provide a financial safety net for retirees, disabled individuals, and low-income Americans. Social Security was signed into law in 1935, while Medicare was authorized in 1965. Both programs are primarily funded through payroll taxes and are backed by designated trust funds. Periodically, trustees report on the status of these funds to inform the public and guide legislative action. Such reports often cause concern, especially as demographic trends like increased longevity and declining birthrates strain the ratio of workers to beneficiaries.
Fact-Check of Specific Claims
Claim #1: “The trust fund Social Security relies on to pay retirement benefits may be depleted in 2033.”
This claim is accurate. According to the June 2025 report from the Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees, the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund is projected to be depleted in 2033. If no changes are made to the funding structure, the government would only be able to pay roughly 77% of scheduled benefits at that time. These findings match data provided by both the Social Security Administration and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
Claim #2: “Social Security’s combined trust funds… will have enough revenue to pay scheduled benefits and administrative costs until 2034.”
This claim is also accurate but warrants some clarification. The combined trust funds—OASI and the Disability Insurance (DI) fund—are projected to be exhausted by 2034, one year earlier than previously estimated. However, as the article correctly notes, the law does not legally allow these funds to be merged or borrowed against one another. Though the combined figure is frequently cited to illustrate broader solvency, presenting it without clarification may give readers the impression that the government could simply combine them, which is not currently permitted under U.S. law. Still, the numeric projections themselves are consistent with those in the Trustees’ report.
Claim #3: “Medicare’s Hospital Insurance trust fund… will be able to pay full benefits until 2033… three years earlier than projected last year.”
This is accurate. The Medicare Part A Hospital Insurance (HI) trust fund is now projected to run out of reserves in 2033—three years earlier than estimated in the 2024 trustees’ report. After depletion, revenue from payroll taxes would be sufficient to cover roughly 89% of scheduled payments. These figures come directly from the 2025 Medicare Trustees Report and are confirmed by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).
Claim #4: “To shore up Social Security and Medicare’s trust funds, Congress may raise taxes, cut benefits or a combination of both.”
This is a true and well-established policy assessment. The potential solutions for addressing trust fund shortfalls typically involve increasing revenue (via tax hikes), reducing outlays (through benefits cuts), or combining both. These strategies have been widely discussed by economists, policymakers, and budget analysts across the political spectrum and are consistent with past reforms, such as those enacted in 1983 under President Reagan.
However, the article does not support the reader’s submitted concern that “the government is waiting for a crisis to slash benefits and call it reform.” There is no substantial evidence to indicate that Congress or the executive branch is deliberately delaying action with the intent to force unpopular reforms. While some believe that crisis moments tend to prompt faster reforms, that pattern reflects legislative inertia rather than a coordinated strategy.
Conclusion
The CNBC article is largely accurate in its reporting of updated trust fund depletion dates and projected benefit reductions for both Social Security and Medicare. It properly reflects figures from the 2025 Trustees Reports and includes valid commentary from key officials. However, the article could have offered more context about how Congress typically approaches entitlement reform and clarified that the combining of trust funds is not legally allowed under current law.
The report does not contain misleading information or clear political bias. However, the complexity of public trust fund rules and options for reform may leave some readers confused or misinformed if they read between the lines or apply personal skepticism not supported by the facts.
Take Action Now
Want to stay ahead of misinformation and clarify confusing headlines like these?
Download the DBUNK App to access real-time fact checks, verify claims on the go, and be part of a truth-first news community.
