Home > Identity Theft > 4 Big Problems With Social Security Numbers

Comments 5 Comments

A Social Security number is like a skeleton key — able to unlock a kingdom of untold riches for identity thieves. It is the central piece of data needed to hijack our credit, steal our health insurance, use us as human shields and generally wreak havoc in our lives. And every day, two branches of the U.S. government — the executive and the legislative — put our identities and sometimes even our lives at risk because of their mismanagement of Social Security numbers.

There have been efforts in Congress to reform Social Security numbers, but unsurprisingly, gridlock has prevented that from happening. And while Congressional inaction around Social Security number reform jeopardizes our future financial well-being, federal agencies’ needless exposure of our Social Security numbers practically guarantees financial insecurity now.

Here are four ways congressional and federal foot-dragging around the issue of Social Security numbers puts our identities at risk.

1. Medicare

Anyone with a Medicare card knows that their Social Security number is printed right on the thing. And any security expert will tell you that the failure to decouple the Social Security number from the Medicare Identification Number is both dangerous and illogical. It is nothing short of ironic that the government would needlessly jeopardize the financial security of the most vulnerable segment of our population through a program that was created to protect them. While the problem should be imminently fixable, the bureaucrats who run the program seem the most recalcitrant about implementing a solution.

When Edith Byrd waved her Medicare ID card during Bill Clinton’s keynote address at the Democratic National Convention last year, there was a brief flurry of attention to the government gaffe that keeps on giving.

“Displaying such information on Medicare cards unnecessarily places millions of individuals at-risk for identity theft,” a government investigator found in 2008.

“This is particularly troubling because [Medicare] instructs individuals, many of whom are elderly, to carry their Medicare card with them when away from home.”

The folks who run Medicare argue that it costs too much to fix this problem — more than $800 million. Assuming that were true (the Government Accountability Office found the estimate bogus and called upon Medicare to stop making excuses ), in the world of cost benefit analysis, how does this one-time charge compare to the billions of dollars it costs consumers, taxpayers and the government to deal with identity theft annually?

Meanwhile, Congress dithers. The original Medicare Identity Theft Prevention Act was introduced in 2011 with 51 co-sponsors from both parties. It passed the House in 2012, but died in the Senate. This year the same House Republicans introduced the same bill (currently in Committee) and two separate bills have been introduced in the Senate that would force Medicare to make the change. Unlike the last time around, the Senate bills were introduced without Republican co-sponsors. According to GovTrack.us, the best one, introduced by Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), has just a 10% chance of surviving past committee, and only a 2% chance of becoming law. In other words, the Chicago Cubs have a better shot at winning the World Series.

2. Tax Documents

Anyone who’s filed their taxes over the years might reasonably assume that our entire tax system would become dysfunctional were Social Security Numbers not displayed prominently on W-2 forms.

Well, not exactly. The fact that SSN-laden documents are delivered to millions of mailboxes and inboxes every year with little protection and “Important Tax Information Enclosed” prominently displayed on envelopes constantly exposes us to the threat of identity theft. Further, it likely contributes to the potentially $21 billion in lost revenue due to fraudulent refund requests that escape IRS filters by 2016.

Sending a W-2 complete with a name and SSN is akin to mailing a signed blank check.

President Obama’s proposed budget would allow employers to strip SSNs from the W-2 forms they provide employees and the IRS and replace them with an alternative unique identifying number for each employee.

The IRS has its own proposal, to replace the SSN with a “truncated taxpayer identification number,” which the rest of the world calls “the last four digits of your Social.”

The IRS proposal is arguably less effective, since so much information is out there already and so many algorithms exist to take partial numbers and combine them with other data about us.

The President’s plan for an entirely separate number may offer greater protection, but the reality is that unbridled partisanship puts its passage in doubt.

3. The Military

In 2008, the Defense Department ordered all branches of the military to stop using SSNs to identify soldiers and veterans. The process has been a considerable challenge and the mission is far from accomplished, partly because the practice was so ingrained in military culture. Across the U.S. and the globe, soldiers regularly used their SSNs to check out basketballs from on-base gyms, access firing ranges, fill out health forms and track their laundry.

The original deadline set by the Department to remove Social Security numbers from new and renewed Military ID cards was the end of 2009.

It missed that one by a country mile, continuing the practice until June 2011. While SSNs no longer appear on the face of the card, the Department only started removing SSN embedded barcodes that are printed on the back of ID cards in 2012, and is not yet done.

I’m at a loss. If during the Battle of the Bulge, Patton’s 3rd Army could fight a battle, pivot and march a hundred miles, fight another battle (in the midst of a blizzard) and win both in just two short weeks, then removing bar codes from ID cards should be a walk in the park.

As long as SSNs are present in any form, on any ID card, or are used for any military purpose, service members and their families are exposed to the dangers of identity theft, which is one more danger than they should have to worry about.

4. Child Identity Theft

A child’s SSN is worth more to a thief than an adult’s because it can take years (perhaps even a decade) for the crime to be discovered. The lag time between crime and detection allows untold stealth damage to occur, often saddling young adults with years of trashed credit or worse. One study found that 10.2% of all children surveyed had loans, utility bills and real estate associated with their SSNs.

A partial (albeit reactive) remedy is to make it easier for children to get new SSNs if their originals were compromised by identity thieves. The Social Security Administration is considering the change, and it’s about time. The agency’s vision is far too narrow, however. It proposes allowing Social Security number changes by children ages 13 and under. As the Federal Trade Commission pointed out, identity theft affects children ages 14 to 17 too, “and the repercussions are just as severe as when it occurs to a younger child.”

In light of our heightened interest in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, when it comes to protecting Americans from damage caused by government-mandated overuse of our Social Security numbers, perhaps our friends in Washington should take a closer look at the Preamble, which states that a properly functioning government should, “insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare….”

While some agencies are moving in the right direction with regard to the reforms of Social Security numbers, they need to move much faster. And as for the rest, one could argue that they’re failing to respect the will of our Founding Fathers. If that argument doesn’t get the current crop of politicians and bureaucrats moving, I imagine they will be sufficiently motivated once they discover they (or their family members, friends or big contributors) have become victims of identity theft. Given the current state of affairs, it is inevitable.

Image: iStockphoto

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

  • http://frugalguruguide.com/articles/ Jenny @ Frugal Guru Guide

    The convenience for the government and other groups makes the security of your SSN all but laughable, unfortunately.

  • Pingback: The ABCs of Back-to-School Identity Theft Protection ← WORLD NEWS()

  • Pingback: I Can’t Get My Free Credit Report | Best Credit Repair()

  • juju

    Why does every place always ask for SSN? Why are we without thinking just hand the SSN over? and then we worry about IT.

  • SaturdaySportsman

    The Social Security Number was never intended to be used for anything other than to identify you for the Social Security program. Any other use was supposed to have been prohibited.

  • JohninCT

    The original FICA Act prohibited the use of the number for identification. When asked, I always tell them to pick something else. However, forget the government, the SSA tossed up it’s hands in surrender back when Nixon was Pres. and allowed the banking system to commandeer the number.
    What’s needed is to reinforce the original law and include a $10,000 fine for the requesting organization and a $5,000 fine for any individual working for those companies every time they request it as a means of identification.

  • http://www.Credit.com/ Gerri Detweiler

    We recommend you contact the Social Security Administration with your question. We don’t know how that works.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team