Social Security has a money problem that lawmakers can no longer ignore. According to current projections, Social Security’s trust funds are expected to run out of reserves within the next decade. That doesn’t mean Social Security is going bankrupt, but if nothing changes, benefits could be cut across the board.

The good news is that lawmakers are beginning to put forward solutions. The bad news is that none of them are painless. Here are three policy recommendations lawmakers are talking about.

Option 1: Borrow and Invest

One proposal comes from Senator Bill Cassidy, R-La.

Under Cassidy’s plan, the federal government would borrow 1.5 trillion and invest the money in a separate fund modeled after retirement savings plans such as 401(k)s. The fund would not be part of Social Security’s existing trust funds. Instead, it would be held in escrow for 75 years. Over time, the investment returns would build up a reserve that could offset future shortfalls and help pay scheduled Social Security benefits.

Supporters of this plan back the long-term investment growth approach. They say the math works if markets perform as expected. Critics, however, worry about the risks of tying Social Security’s future to market performance and adding $1.5 trillion to the national debt upfront.

Option 2: Make High Earners Pay More

In 2026, Social Security payroll taxes only apply to wages up to $184,500. Earnings above that are untaxed.

Enter Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I.

His Medicare and Social Security Fair Share Act would apply Social Security taxes to earnings above $400,000. It would also apply the tax to investment income. And it would close a loophole that lets some wealthy owners of pass-through businesses avoid paying Medicare taxes.

Supporters of this bill say higher earners should shoulder more of the burden because income inequality has increased over time.

Critics argue that it could discourage investment and entrepreneurship while shifting more of the burden to successful business owners and professionals.

Option 3: Cap Benefits for High earners

Some policymakers are focusing on benefits rather than taxes.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has proposed limiting Social Security benefits for high earners who consistently hit the taxable maximum earnings during their working years. Rather than increasing payroll taxes, the plan would cap annual Social Security benefits at $100,000 for married couples and $50,000 for individuals.

The plan is based on the idea that Social Security was designed as a safety net, not a retirement windfall for the wealthy.

Supporters of this plan say that targeting benefits for those with the greatest financial need could help preserve the program’s long-term stability.

Critics argue that workers who paid more into the system throughout their careers should receive the benefits they earned.

What This Means for Workers and Retirees

At this point, nothing is finalized. Lawmakers could choose one of these proposals, combine several approaches, or pursue an entirely different solution. But it seems increasingly likely that Congress will pass some combination of tax increases and benefit adjustments.

For workers, the best move is to keep building retirement savings outside of Social Security. For retirees, stay informed and let your representatives know where you stand.