This article was originally published by Willow Tohi at Natural News.
-
- The Social Security Administration has announced a 2.8% cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for 2026.
-
- The increase, while slightly above forecasts, is based on the CPI-W index, which tracks spending by workers, not retirees.
-
- Advocacy groups argue this methodology systematically undercounts inflation experienced by seniors, eroding their purchasing power.
-
- Proposals to use the CPI-E index, which reflects seniors’ expenses, have stalled in Congress.
-
- The persistent gap between official and real-world inflation poses a long-term threat to retiree financial security.
In an announcement that brought modest relief to millions, the Social Security Administration confirmed on October 24, 2025, that benefits will increase by 2.8 percent in 2026. The Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA), designed to protect the purchasing power of approximately 75 million Americans, will provide an average monthly raise of about $56. While the figure slightly exceeded some economists’ forecasts, a deeper analysis reveals a persistent and alarming structural flaw. The method used to calculate this annual raise, critics argue, systematically underestimates the true inflation faced by retirees, functioning as a hidden tax that gradually diminishes their standard of living.
The mechanics of the adjustment
The annual COLA is not a discretionary bonus but a statutory requirement tied to the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). This index, produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), measures price changes for households derived from urban wage earners and clerical workers. The calculation compares the CPI-W from the third quarter of the previous year to the third quarter of the current year, with the resulting percentage increase applied to the following year’s benefits. The 2.8 percent figure for 2026 reflects a modest cooling of inflation from the peaks seen earlier in the decade. Social Security Administration Commissioner Frank J. Bisignano stated the COLA ensures benefits “reflect today’s economic realities,” yet the very reality of retiree spending is where the formula breaks down.
A metric mismatch for modern retirees
The core of the controversy lies in the use of the CPI-W. This index reflects the spending habits of a working-age population, whose consumption patterns differ significantly from those of seniors. Working households spend a larger portion of their budget on education, technology and transportation. Retirees, by contrast, allocate a far greater share of their fixed incomes to healthcare, prescription drugs and housing—precisely the categories where inflation has been most stubborn. For years, advocacy organizations like The Senior Citizens League have pressed Congress to adopt the Consumer Price Index for the Elderly (CPI-E), an existing BLS index that tracks the spending of households with individuals aged 62 and older. Historically, the CPI-E has shown a higher rate of inflation than the CPI-W, meaning the current COLA formula is inherently conservative.
Shannon Benton, Executive Director of The Senior Citizens League, has pointedly criticized the inertia, noting that switching to the CPI-E would not require creating a new metric. “It already exists, and by definition, it’s better for American seniors,” Benton asserted. The failure to adopt this more accurate measure, despite its availability, results in COLAs that consistently lag behind the actual cost increases retirees experience. Over the last 20 years, the average COLA has been 2.6 percent, a period during which healthcare costs have routinely outpaced general inflation.
The cumulative erosion of purchasing power
The annual shortfall may seem small, but its cumulative effect is devastating. Consider a retiree receiving a
$1,500 monthly benefit. A 2.8 percent COLA adds $42, bringing the new total to $1,542. However, if the true inflation rate for seniors, as measured by a hypothetical CPI-E, were 3.5 percent, the required increase would be $52.50. The retiree immediately falls $10.50 behind each month. Compounded over a decade or more of retirement, this gap represents a significant loss of purchasing power. This slow-motion erosion forces difficult choices between essentials like food, utilities and medications, undermining the very purpose of Social Security as a foundational pillar of retirement security. For the 40 percent of older Americans for whom Social Security is the primary source of income, this is not an abstract economic debate but a daily financial pressure.
A historical promise at risk
The debate over the COLA formula is not new, but it has gained urgency in an era of persistent inflation and longer life expectancies. The Social Security Act’s promise was to provide a stable, inflation-protected benefit for life. The reliance on the CPI-W, a product of a bygone era, now threatens that covenant. While political discussions often focus on the solvency of the Social Security trust fund, the quiet erosion of benefits through an inaccurate inflation metric presents an immediate and growing crisis. Ensuring the system’s long-term sustainability is critical, but it is a hollow victory if the benefits it pays fail to keep pace with the real-world costs of those it is designed to protect.
An unsustainable trajectory
The 2.8 percent COLA for 2026 provides a temporary, numerical increase for millions of retirees. Yet, beneath the surface, the structural flaw in its calculation continues to impose a stealthy financial penalty on a vulnerable population. As healthcare costs continue their upward climb and seniors grapple with inflated prices for basic necessities, the gap between their official COLA and their real-life expenses widens. Without a legislative shift to a more accurate inflation index, the foundational security of Social Security will continue to be chipped away, year after year, leaving retirees increasingly exposed to the economic realities the COLA was meant to shield them from.
Read the full article here
