How safe is Social Security under Trump? Here are some things to know.

Now the Trump administration, which has vowed to disrupt government programs, is making a lot of people nervous about Social Security, which Congress created 90 years ago. Some say support for Social Security is too wide and too deep for the administration to seriously alter its basic bargain, yet nothing seems entirely out of bounds.

On Tuesday, the Social Security Administration announced it will impose tighter identity-proofing measures, which will limit the ability of recipients and applicants to transact certain kinds of business with the agency over the phone.

The new measures, which go into effect on March 31, will impact new applicants for benefits and those already receiving benefits who want to change their direct deposit banks.

Currently, applicants can verify their identity in applications and recipients can change their banks by phone, but in an effort to cut fraudulent claims, the new measures limit such transactions to being done online or in person.

The impact of the new rules could be significant for older Americans who have limited internet skills or access and live far from Social Security offices, especially in rural areas.

Here’s what to know about Social Security:

Why is Social Security a potential target?

If the objective is to shrink the $6.7 trillion federal budget, there’s no bigger target than Social Security. Its spending represents more than $1 out of every $5 spent by the government, its single largest source of expenditures.

Has the Trump administration said it will cut Social Security?

No, quite the opposite. President Trump on March 11, said flat-out he will not touch Social Security. Here’s the official statement from the White House: “The Trump Administration will not cut Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid benefits. President Trump himself has said it over and over and over again.”

Shouldn’t that end any discussion of Social Security cuts?

Defenders of Social Security — some of the loudest are political opponents of the president — don’t want to be caught flat-footed if, lo and behold, the Trump administration changes its mind. And there’s cause for concern. The same White House official statement quotes Elon Musk as describing Social Security, Medicare, and other “entitlement spending,” as being rife with “waste and fraud,” the elimination of which could save taxpayers as much as $700 billion a year (about 10 percent of the federal budget.)

It sounds like the Trump administration wants to eliminate waste and fraud while preserving Social Security itself.

That’s correct — and who could defend waste and fraud? The trouble is that Musk has also publicly described Social Security as “the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time,” and it’s hard to imagine a measured approach to cutting waste and fraud after seeing a gleeful Musk wielding a chainsaw as a symbol of his budget-cutting approach. Democrats say the emphasis on waste and fraud may be a pretext for attacking the program itself. And organizations that represent older Americans, including AARP, are on high alert.

But is there waste and fraud in the Social Security system?

Yes, undoubtedly, there is. But I think partisans on both sides are susceptible to putting a political spin on the data that are out there. Certainly Trump made a big show out of saying millions of people older than 100 — including some older than 160 — were collecting Social Security checks. He got loud cheers from Republicans in his recent speech to Congress. But that is false. There are millions of people over age 100 in the Social Security Administration’s database, but the vast majority are not receiving benefits. The Social Security Administration has opened itself to such exaggerated criticism by not cleaning up its files by eliminating the names of millions of deceased Americans who remain listed (but not paid).

How are Democrats reacting to the perceived threat to Social Security?

Some say Trump and Musk are insisting on deep cuts in Social Security personnel and new rules for accessing benefits and getting help to sow chaos. Connecticut Representative John Larson, a Democrat on the Social Security Subcommittee, said in a statement that by imposing the new rules, “Trump and Musk are trying to create chaos and inefficiencies [at the Social Security Administration] so they can privatize the system.”

What do we know for sure about the fate of Social Security?

Social Security managers have laid plans to eliminate 7,000 of its 57,000 employees (12 percent) and to close six of 10 regional offices (60 percent) and 480 of its offices (40 percent).

What else do we know about the new measures announced this week?

Social Security leaders say the identity-proofing changes will allow processing of direct-deposit requests in one business day, compared with the current 30 days.

Is Social Security a giveaway?

No, it’s an earned benefit. Take a look at your weekly or biweekly pay statement; you’ll see a 6.2 percent deduction for Social Security. Your employer also contributes 6.2 percent on your behalf. You earned all of it. That’s $12,400 on annual pay of $100,000.

Is Social Security going bankrupt?

No, but there’s a projected funding shortfall. Essentially, the way the system works is that the working generation pays for benefits received by those who are retired. (I guess in Musk’s mind this makes it a Ponzi scheme.) The trouble is that the baby boomer generation currently moving into retirement outnumber those who are working and paying into the system. Basically, Social Security payouts are increasing a lot faster than contributions.

What’s going to happen?

Only Congress can change Social Security benefits, assuming the Trump administration abides by the Constitution. Current financial projections suggest Social Security will no longer have the cash needed to pay all benefits in 10 years.

Congress can provide adequate funding by increasing the normal retirement age or increasing the payroll tax. Many analysts think that won’t happen until the 11th hour.

Should I hurry up and take my Social Security?

People who can afford to delay taking Social Security until age 70 should do so, because each year of delay increases their eventual benefit by about 8 percent. Financial analysts say that continues to be a sound strategy. For those close to the age when they want to take their benefit, it can be a little nerve-wracking as you wonder whether something draconian will happen, or if accessing your benefit will become exceedingly difficult due to cuts in personnel.

Didn’t Trump pledge to make Social Security benefits nontaxable?

During his campaign, he wrote on social media, “Seniors should not pay tax on Social Security” and he reiterated that in his address to Congress.

Most people pay taxes on 85 percent of their Social Security income (it’s an even lower percentage for lower-income retirees). Massachusetts does not tax Social Security income.

---

Got a problem? Send your consumer issue to sean.murphy@globe.com. Follow him @spmurphyboston.