topic Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation in Social Security

Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

GailL1 — Tue, 07 Nov 2017 18:26:13 GMT

Update to those who are involved in these Social Security situations-

Here is the newest legislation to be introduced to repeal the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision and the Pension Offset.

H.R. 1205 - Social Security Fairness Act of 2017

introduced 02/2017 by Rep. Rodney Davis (R - IL)

currently 158 co-sponsors

has gone through the Ways and Means Committee

now in the sub-committee for Social Security

identical bill in the Senate S.915

introducedm04/2017 by Senator Sherrod Brown (D - OH)

currently 9 co-sponsors

In the Finance Commttee

S. 915 Social Security Fairness Act of 2017

Here is what the Committee for the Preservation of Social Security and Medicare says about this proposed legislation.

NCPSSM Public Policy - Government Pension Offset and Windfall Elimination Provision

Only position I could find from AARP, although the article does not bear a year , John Rother left this position in 2011 - current AARP position ???????

AARP has not taken a position on GPO or WEP and neither supports nor opposes either piece of legislation. AARP’s public policies are recommended by its all volunteer National Legislative Council and approved by its volunteer Board of Directors. The Board has considered the issues but chose not to adopt policy on either the government pension offset (GPO) or the windfall elimination provision (WEP). Many teachers and public employees have been told they are being singled out for unfair treatment, but the issue is complex and if there were an injustice, AARP would be there fighting to correct it.

Washington Post ViewPoint : John Rother, AARP's Director of Policy and Strategy, on Social Security

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

cn5621 — Wed, 08 Nov 2017 00:12:40 GMT

@GailL1 wrote:
Update to those who are involved in these Social Security situations-

Here is the newest legislation to be introduced to repeal the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision and the Pension Offset.

H.R. 1205 - Social Security Fairness Act of 2017

introduced 02/2017 by Rep. Rodney Davis (R - IL)
currently 158 co-sponsors
has gone through the Ways and Means Committee
now in the sub-committee for Social Security

identical bill in the Senate S.915
introducedm04/2017 by Senator Sherrod Brown (D - OH)
currently 9 co-sponsors
In the Finance Commttee
S. 915 Social Security Fairness Act of 2017

Here is what the Committee for the Preservation of Social Security and Medicare says about this proposed legislation.
NCPSSM Public Policy - Government Pension Offset and Windfall Elimination Provision

Only position I could find from AARP, although the article does not bear a year , John Rother left this position in 2011 - current AARP position ???????

AARP has not taken a position on GPO or WEP and neither supports nor opposes either piece of legislation. AARP’s public policies are recommended by its all volunteer National Legislative Council and approved by its volunteer Board of Directors. The Board has considered the issues but chose not to adopt policy on either the government pension offset (GPO) or the windfall elimination provision (WEP). Many teachers and public employees have been told they are being singled out for unfair treatment, but the issue is complex and if there were an injustice, AARP would be there fighting to correct it.

Washington Post ViewPoint : John Rother, AARP's Director of Policy and Strategy, on Social Security

Anything that involves SSN should be a Red Flag issue with AARP. Why do they think the majority of us join. Any issue that involves the V.A. or SSN is #1 with me. I am concerned with other issues but these two are at the top of my list

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

GailL1 — Wed, 08 Nov 2017 23:14:55 GMT

@cn5621 wrote:
@Gail1wrote:

Only position I could find from AARP, although the article does not bear a year , John Rother left this position in 2011 - current AARP position ???????

AARP has not taken a position on GPO or WEP and neither supports nor opposes either piece of legislation. AARP’s public policies are recommended by its all volunteer National Legislative Council and approved by its volunteer Board of Directors. The Board has considered the issues but chose not to adopt policy on either the government pension offset (GPO) or the windfall elimination provision (WEP). Many teachers and public employees have been told they are being singled out for unfair treatment, but the issue is complex and if there were an injustice, AARP would be there fighting to correct it.

Washington Post ViewPoint : John Rother, AARP's Director of Policy and Strategy, on Social Security

Anything that involves SSN should be a Red Flag issue with AARP. Why do they think the majority of us join. Any issue that involves the V.A. or SSN is #1 with me. I am concerned with other issues but these two are at the top of my list

On these particular Social Security issues, I can understand why they have not taken a position. The fix, if one is necessary, may just require a formula change - that's the debate in Congress. We cannot go back to the way they use to do it because that was a problem.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

cm70778011 — Thu, 23 Nov 2017 14:30:50 GMT

I understand the concept of not double dipping but how is it double dipping to take 40% from someone already penalized for only having 20 years of Social security payments, Especially when my SS payments were much higher than most due to my salary. As it stands someone earning 20,000 will get more than I will just by paying in , I am also penalized for being from another country where my State pension is 20 years short due to wanting to be a US Citizen. Now I will get reduced pension from there and from the US and they think this is fair to further cut what I will get Railmen agreement yes I agree should not recieve both but thier pensions are substantially the same from either.. I am not trying to double dip just get back what I have paid for for 20 years.. Any congress men/woman should support the abolition of what is nothing less than a disgusting law to the average hard working citizens of this country, President Trump if you are for the working class Amarican you should in all good concience look into this.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

ReTiReD51 — Tue, 19 Dec 2017 14:26:48 GMT

I know people affected by Ronald Reagan signing the Windfall Elimination Provision and Government Pension Offset provisions into law as part of the Social Security Refinancing Act in 1983 during his first term, who turned around and voted for Reagan for his second term. How smart is that?

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

JohnF878645 — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 12:14:51 GMT

Somebody help me understand why AARP has not taken a position on this HR to repeal the WEP? WEP is nothing short of discrimination against retired federal employees. At the very least, if you're going to receive a highly reduced SS amount, why weren't we paying in a highly reduced amount?

Very dissapointing. And you want retired federal employees to join AARP?

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

GailL1 — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 16:02:37 GMT

@JohnF878645 wrote:
Somebody help me understand why AARP has not taken a position on this HR to repeal the WEP? WEP is nothing short of discrimination against retired federal employees. At the very least, if you're going to receive a highly reduced SS amount, why weren't we paying in a highly reduced amount?

Very dissapointing. And you want retired federal employees to join AARP?

They have a policy.

AARP Public Policies 2017 - 2018 - State and Local Government Workers

Look, all we are talking about here is a Social Security formula. If you do not pay and your employer does not match contributions on the wages which you earn, then those wages should not be counted towards this benefit.

During those years, contributions were made to a public pension - so those wages and contributions have been counted towards this benefit.

I know people who are getting full benefits on both because they worked under both coverage options for the required number of years to be completely vested in both.

Even if the formula is changed, if there is not sufficient counted work in the private sector where SS contributions were made and matched by the employer, this SS benefit will be low(er) because the Pension Offset would probably expanded.

BTW, I am pretty sure that Federal workers have been paying into the Social Security system since 1984 so for them, any reduced benefit is dwindling big time.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

JohnF878645 — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 23:34:47 GMT

You need to read about WEP on the SS website so you understand it. I “am” vested in both as I worked and paid into SS both before and after my federal career to where I have 40 quarters plus. It’s a penalty for having another retirement source. Plain and simple.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

SteveT934531 — Sat, 24 Feb 2018 18:04:32 GMT

Like so many who have commented on this issue I suffer from this inequity. Unfortunately members of Congress listen to those who complain, sympathize with the problem, however shift the responsibility for lack of advancement of pending legislation to committees, sub-committees, hearings, etc. These excuses persist year after year with no resolution. One would believe that no bills ever advance, however this not the case as we all know. The voice of those who have reached retirement age fall upon deaf ears, and those of us who are denied the benefits we have rightly earned will I am afraid NEVER see this “wrong” righted. It’s a sad testimony to what moral and ethical values associated with hard work produce in our country.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

GailL1 — Sat, 24 Feb 2018 23:41:33 GMT

@SteveT934531, @JohnF878645

In a nutshell, they don't know how to figure it to be fair.

Social Security WEP History

The old way was not fair because it paid too much so we won't go back to that way.

My neighbor is a plumber - he worked for the local school system not under the SS system. He also had his own company where he "moonlighted" and paid SS on this salary. He worked for the school system around 25 years. When he retired and began his pension from the school system, he continued to work at his company until he had accumulated a work history in the SS system of 30 years.

He gets both pension and SS and is not affected by the WEB because he had an overall substantial work history under the SS system.

You have to have at least 10 years of work history with a minimum of earnings for those years to be vested into the SS system. For low wage earners, they work their whole length of their career (30 or more years) under the SS system to get the minimum benefit. People who work mainly outside the SS system but who may have 10 years or more (but less than 30) working in a job within the SS system are not low wage earners and thus their benefits cannot be figured as if they were as was done before the WEP.

So they came up with the WEP because if you worked 10 years under the SS system, you are entitled to a benefit but only one that represents the amount of time and contributions which were made under the SS system.

I do not know if the WEP is fair but I do know the way they use to figure it was "double dipping" because they considered these worker as low wage earners and gave them credit as such under the SS system.

You are outliers. You are outside the regular computation of benefits. You don't fit into the normal computation unless you work under the SS system for about 30 years, even at a low wage.

Perhaps you should opt for some special manual computation since there are relatively few in this situation.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

l508156s — Wed, 18 Jul 2018 03:24:18 GMT

If you put money in 2 seperate banks are you denied the use of funds from one? No. But this is what the WEP does to a number of workers who paid into both Social Security and a pension. What I would get without the WEP is pittance but with it poverty. I hope the RTTA and Mass Retired Teachers and the NEA can get congress to do something and either repeal or change the formula.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

l508156s — Wed, 18 Jul 2018 03:33:46 GMT

I was working for the Federal Government in 1983. All they told us was they were eliminating the the Civil Service Retirement System and changing to one where you paid into Social Security. They pushed the new plan but never told us how it would affect our Social Security benefits. I voted for the other guy.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

GailL1 — Fri, 20 Jul 2018 21:26:49 GMT

@l508156s wrote:
If you put money in 2 seperate banks are you denied the use of funds from one? No. But this is what the WEP does to a number of workers who paid into both Social Security and a pension. What I would get without the WEP is pittance but with it poverty. I hope the RTTA and Mass Retired Teachers and the NEA can get congress to do something and either repeal or change the formula.

@l508156s

It is not like a bank account - more like an insurace policy. There is no SS account just for you where your premiums are credited. A persons SS benefit is figured on the amount of time they have made contributions to the program and what their average wages were during that entire time.

How you qualify for retirement benefits?

When you work and pay Social Security taxes, you earn

“credits” toward Social Security benefits. The number of

credits you need to get retirement benefits depends on

when you were born. If you were born in 1929 or later,

you need 40 credits (10 years of work).

How much will your retirement benefit be?

If you stop working before you have enough credits to

qualify for benefits, the credits will remain on your Social

Security record. If you return to work later, you can add

more credits to qualify. We can’t pay any retirement

benefits until you have the required number of credits.

We base your benefit payment on how much you earned

during your working career. Higher lifetime earnings result

in higher benefits. If there were some years you didn’t

work or had low earnings, your benefit amount may be

lower than if you had worked steadily.

https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10035.pdf

Most likely there would have to be a formula change because the formula was what was wrong with it before the change.

Most likely a formula would have to invented JUST for them because the regular formula does not work and many of the standard rules would have to go by the wayside.

they have not worked long enough under and within the SS program to be vested in it since they did not pay these payroll taxes when at their government job where they are getting their pension.
new bend points to figure their AIM, to comput their benefit) would have to be determined based on their wages ONLY at their SS covered job

Somehow, for any change to be equitable, SSA has to figure these type claims differently, perhaps on a manuel basis and I am not too sure they aren't coming out ahead the way things currently are figured - so even a new formula might not give these folks what they think they deserve because it will depend on how long they worked under the SS system, what their wage range was during that time.

They didn't pay into the SS system at their government job - so none of that salary or time will be included.

Then would this be fair to others who didn't work long enough under the SS system to be vested?

Yes, it is very complicated.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

l508156s — Sat, 21 Jul 2018 02:22:01 GMT

I have all required quarters and more. I paid into Social Security both before and after I worked for the Government. I sorta of understand what you are saying but on the other hand why can some who worked the same amonunt of time with the same number of quarters get all their Socila Security and I can't. I do not expect to get what someone who worked 35-40 years but I would like more then the 40% they might give me.My Civil Service Retiremrnt went into a different pot of money. Same for City and State Workers. Social Security has had my money since 1981 and I am sure they have made plenty of interest off it. The real issue is not double dipping but the fact Congress has been using Social Security to pay for stuff.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

l508156s — Sun, 22 Jul 2018 17:07:08 GMT

The system knows how to tell the difference between a lifetime low income wage earner and someone who only worked 10 years. I tried an experiment. I plugged in $3700 for each year from 1971-2018. My benefit was $760. Doing it with my actual years and income I get $518. So it goes to show the theory behind WEP is flawed. They stole a days pay 3 out 4 years on top of eliminating a good chunk of our Social Security. And what about folks that after 20 years gave up a good career to teach expecting they would get their Social Security.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

LonnieC924336 — Thu, 23 Aug 2018 13:01:44 GMT

I am losing over $300 a month because of this tax.I get two partial checks instead of a full retirement. i worked 24 years for s.s. and 19 years for the school system.I got cheated Big Time.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

GailL1 — Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:16:26 GMT

@LonnieC924336 wrote:
I am losing over $300 a month because of this tax.I get two partial checks instead of a full retirement. i worked 24 years for s.s. and 19 years for the school system.I got cheated Big Time.

You could work for (6) more years, earning what the government deems to be substantial earnings

under a job covered by the SS system and the WEP would go away - Substantial earnings has also a definition under the SS system - defined by year - in 2018, a bit less than $ 2000 a month - but the figure is actually a yearly figure.

SSA Windfall Elimination Provision

from the link ~

If you paid Social Security tax on 30 years of substantial earnings you are not affected by WEP.

There is also a chart of the "substantial earnings" by year in this pamphlet (above link).

Sorry can't help you with your school system pension - that is a local matter.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

BarbaraS357124 — Mon, 27 Aug 2018 02:51:51 GMT

This should be a no brainer as far as repealing the WPO & GPO. This issue crosses party lines. Our teachers and other service providers give their whole lives and only want what’s fair. No one is asking to get money from SS security if they haven’t contributed.

In the majority of cases, like my own, people have put into BOTH Social Security and pensions. People in the private sector can get both at retirement. Why should teachers or other service providers be any different. Why is that considered double dipping when business executives do it all the time.

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

GailL1 — Mon, 27 Aug 2018 12:13:22 GMT

@BarbaraS357124

I have no doubt that the Windfall Elimination Provision needs some work - but that is the problem - the formula that it is used to compute any benefit. The old method did not work because it was TOO generous, the new one maybe TOO punitive, maybe for some. However, even the legislation that has been proposed is gonna still leave some high and dry.

I contend that the only way this may be fixed is by some special computation done as an exception, yes, perhaps manually, on a per person basis when this situation is apparent. It would only make a substantial difference if the affected person has many years of working under the SS system with substanial earning. The bend ponts now used to figure the PIA ( primary insurance amount ) from the AIME ( Average Indexed Monthly Earnings ) would have to be adjusted without giving the progressive benefit of a low income earner, as is normally done on a person who has worked their career under a job covered by the SS system.

There is NO other method that can produce a fair SS benefit because this situation is an outlier from regular benefits. How much difference it would then make, figured this way without the progressive formula - I doubt too much.

TIME.com 04/22/2015 - This Little-Known Pension Rule May Slash Your Social Security Benefit

THIS IS THE PROBLEM >>>>>> The Social Security benefits calculating program uses a progressive formula that aims to return the highest amount to the lowest-earning workers—the same idea that drives our system of income tax brackets.

It is a complex formula, but here is the upshot: Without the WEP, a worker who had just 20 years of employment covered by Social Security, rather than 30, would be in position to get a much higher return because of those brackets.

. . . . Just because a person worked only a portion of their career with Social Security-covered employment, they should not be benefiting by getting a higher rate of return.

That was what was happening under the previous rule, under the regular computation and thus the reason why the WEP was initiated in the 80's.

Earlier in this thread I gave an example of a person who understood all the WEP and planned accordingly - He worked under the SS system for 30 years - early on, he worked for an employer under the system and then he became self-employed under which his earning were under the SS system at the same time he was working for a local school system. So, he earned a nice pension from the school system AND worked 30 years with substantial earnings under the SS system - the WEP does not affect him at all.

If you have 30 years of Social Security-covered employment with somewhat of a minimum required substantial earnings, no WEP is applied. Below that, a sliding WEP scale is applied.

The maximum loss is set at 50% of whatever you receive from your separate pension, so if that is relatively small, the WEP effect will be minimal.

Can you do anything to avoid getting whacked by WEP? Working longer in a Social Security-covered job before retiring might help. Remember, you are immune to the provision if you have 30 years of what Social Security defines as “substantial earnings” in covered work.

ALL Retirement income of whatever type REQUIRES Planning - Social Security, Pension, Tax-deferred plans, Non-tax deferred plans, where monies are invested and exposure to any gains or losses.

SSA: Windfall Elimination Provision explained - includes historic chart of "substantial earnings:

Re: Repealing the Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision And Pension Offset 2017 Legislation

l508156s — Mon, 27 Aug 2018 13:56:47 GMT

@GailL1 wrote:
@BarbaraS357124

I have no doubt that the Windfall Elimination Provision needs some work - but that is the problem - the formula that it is used to compute any benefit. The old method did not work because it was TOO generous, the new one maybe TOO punitive, maybe for some. However, even the legislation that has been proposed is gonna still leave some high and dry.

I contend that the only way this may be fixed is by some special computation done as an exception, yes, perhaps manually, on a per person basis when this situation is apparent. It would only make a substantial difference if the affected person has many years of working under the SS system with substanial earning. The bend ponts now used to figure the PIA ( primary insurance amount ) from the AIME ( Average Indexed Monthly Earnings ) would have to be adjusted without giving the progressive benefit of a low income earner, as is normally done on a person who has worked their career under a job covered by the SS system.

There is NO other method that can produce a fair SS benefit because this situation is an outlier from regular benefits. How much difference it would then make, figured this way without the progressive formula - I doubt too much.

TIME.com 04/22/2015 - This Little-Known Pension Rule May Slash Your Social Security Benefit

THIS IS THE PROBLEM >>>>>> The Social Security benefits calculating program uses a progressive formula that aims to return the highest amount to the lowest-earning workers—the same idea that drives our system of income tax brackets.

It is a complex formula, but here is the upshot: Without the WEP, a worker who had just 20 years of employment covered by Social Security, rather than 30, would be in position to get a much higher return because of those brackets.

. . . . Just because a person worked only a portion of their career with Social Security-covered employment, they should not be benefiting by getting a higher rate of return.

That was what was happening under the previous rule, under the regular computation and thus the reason why the WEP was initiated in the 80's.

Earlier in this thread I gave an example of a person who understood all the WEP and planned accordingly - He worked under the SS system for 30 years - early on, he worked for an employer under the system and then he became self-employed under which his earning were under the SS system at the same time he was working for a local school system. So, he earned a nice pension from the school system AND worked 30 years with substantial earnings under the SS system - the WEP does not affect him at all.

If you have 30 years of Social Security-covered employment with somewhat of a minimum required substantial earnings, no WEP is applied. Below that, a sliding WEP scale is applied.

The maximum loss is set at 50% of whatever you receive from your separate pension, so if that is relatively small, the WEP effect will be minimal.

Can you do anything to avoid getting whacked by WEP? Working longer in a Social Security-covered job before retiring might help. Remember, you are immune to the provision if you have 30 years of what Social Security defines as “substantial earnings” in covered work.

ALL Retirement income of whatever type REQUIRES Planning - Social Security, Pension, Tax-deferred plans, Non-tax deferred plans, where monies are invested and exposure to any gains or losses.
SSA: Windfall Elimination Provision explained - includes historic chart of "substantial earnings:

The most you can get is 90% of your Social Security. This bit about them paying you your Social Security as if you are a low income wage earner is baloney. They are calculating it on quarters worked. I took the amount I make at my part time job $3800 and put it every year from 1972 to 2011 and I get $700 a month. But with my actual earnings I get 518. It seems to me they should be able to figure ones Social Security based on quarters paid. I would even be okay with if they took the Social Security taxs I and my employer paid then applied interest earned on for the past 35 years.

Then took the amount and divided by life expectancy.

Like the other poster said other companies have pension plans fot their employees so why are they not penalized. Why are State employees penalized their certainly goes in a different account and has no affect on the Federal budget. My money I paid into CSRS went into a different account. Personally I think any money earned before the law went into affect should be exempt from the formula.

Simple fact is SS was short of money in 1983 so they decided the fix it is keep some peoples Social Security.