Billionaires with vast investment resources and inheritance of wealth remain eligible for Social Security retirement benefits under present U.S. law—a system that’s means-testing-optional, centering on payroll tax contributions. Critics bemoan that it allows ultra-high-net-worth individuals to receive benefits they do not financially need, but the program design ensures that all workers with minimum contribution levels, regardless of net worth, are entitled to it.
Eligibility based in payroll taxes, not net worth
Social Security is a program of earned benefits, with employees paying 6.2% of their wages (until a yearly cap) through payroll taxes for at least 10 years (40 credits) to qualify. In 2025, income above $176,100 isn’t taxed on Social Security, allowing billionaires like Warren Buffett to cap annual contributions at $10,918.20 ($176,100 × 6.2%). This stands in stark contrast to median-earners, who must pay tax on 100% of their wages.
Billionaires who earn only from investments (say, dividend income on shares, real estate) with no earnings cannot qualify for benefits, since unearned income is not received through payroll tax. But employees who earn even small wages gain eligibility. Buffett, worth $138 billion, earns a $100,000 Berkshire Hathaway salary to ensure consistent contributions.
The Buffett case: A $3,245 per-month check from modest wages
Buffett’s theoretical Social Security benefit—$3,245 a month if taken in 2024—is based on his limited taxable earnings. That is dwarfed by the 2024 maximum benefit of $4,873 for employees with at or above the wage cap for 35 years. The difference stems from the fact that benefits are computed based on a worker’s highest 35 inflation-indexed earnings years. For Buffett, whose $100,000 income is below the cap, lifetime contributions are modest compared to his fortune.
This framework sparks criticism. Ex-New Jersey Governor Chris Christie argues, “If [Buffett] is taking Social Security, shame on you… You shouldn’t be taking the money”. Legally, though, Buffett’s eligibility is watertight: he meets the 40-credit requirement and pays requisite taxes.
The payroll tax cap: A loophole for the rich
Higher earners exploit the cap on payroll taxes to maintain low contributions. In 2025, when one reaches $176,100, Social Security taxes cease—a threshold that millionaires hit rapidly. For example:
- Elon Musk: As Tesla’s CEO, Musk’s $0 salary (in terms of stock options) in theory exempts him from payroll tax liability. Yet his 2023 $55 billion compensation package—largely stock-based—is exempt from Social Security taxation.
- Corporate CEOs: Tim Cook of Apple and McDonald’s Christopher Kempczinski pay their yearly Social Security tax bills within days since their salaries exceed the cap.
This system creates harsh disparities. A worker with a take-home pay of $50,000 pays 6.2% ($3,100) on gross income, while a CEO with a salary of $20 million pays just 0.03% ($10,918). Eliminating the cap could raise Social Security $3.2 trillion over a decade, covering 53% of its 75-year funding gap, the Urban Institute estimates.
Policy debates: Should billionaires opt out?
Reform debates are rampant with proposals to means-test Social Security or eliminate the wage cap:
- Means-testing benefits: Phasing out or cutting off payments to wealthy retirees is suggested by supporters. Opponents respond that this undermines the program’s universality and penalizes investors.
- Eliminating the tax cap: Charging the 6.2% tax on all earnings, not just the first $176,100, would align contributions with ability to pay. Warren Buffett himself supports this, stating in 2005, “I would raise the [tax] cap” to ensure program solvency.
- Including unearned income: Taxing investment income could broaden the contribution base but is politically difficult.
In spite of these controversies, 77% of Americans oppose benefit cuts for the wealthy if it will save Social Security, and 83% support raising taxes on high-income earners.
The bottom line: Legal entitlement vs. Moral scrutiny
Billionaires’ eligibility for Social Security spotlights a systemic paradox: the program design protects universal coverage but solidifies backdoor regressive taxation. Provided that such beneficiaries as Buffett are in compliance with contribution standards—if only for minuscule wages—they have a right based on law. With the Social Security Trust Fund projected to deplete its finances by 2033, nevertheless, pressure mounts to reconcile fairness with fiscal pragmatism.
For the moment, the answer is simple: yes, billionaires do and can receive Social Security. Whether they should—and how the program develops—hinges on policymakers’ willingness to address its structural injustices.
Read more: Can I lose Social Security payments if my income exceeds limits?
Read more: Bad news for Social Security checks – SSA confirms it will block all payments to those who do not meet this requirement
