Do you have questions about your vision health? The AARP Eye Center has answers.

 

Reply
Info Seeker
4
Kudos
1719
Views

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

1,719 Views
Message 11 of 66
Susan Sterling <susan26428@gmail.com>
2:14 PM (2 minutes ago)
 
 
to WEP.Feedback
 
 
 
I paid enough into my Social Security to draw well over $900 and that was factored into what I believed would be a comfortable retirement life.  I worked before, during and after my Civil Service job. Imagine my shock when I realized I was only going to draw a bit over $300 and now, turning 65, $134 comes out of that.  I never used to understand why elderly people had to choose between food and electric until now. I can't afford any 'gap' medical insurance, and in no way will I have the finances to live a long life, much less a stress-free and enjoyable one, and heaven forbid I get really sick.  I guess this is why some people choose death as well. 
 
WEP needs to be repealed - I don't understand why the powers that be admit it was a mistake, but no one seems to be able to fix it.  I only get a 'robo reply' from my elected officials with a promise of followup.  But no followup comes. 
 
Please, help us!
Report Inappropriate Content
4
Kudos
1719
Views
Conversationalist
1
Kudos
2052
Views

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

2,052 Views
Message 12 of 66

Please submit your personal stories on the impact of WEP and any comments to: WEP.Feedback@mail.house.gov   and provide input to the Committee.

 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
2052
Views
Bronze Conversationalist
0
Kudos
2087
Views

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

2,087 Views
Message 13 of 66

Having reached full retirement age, I decided to apply for my Social Security. I had a conversation with my Socila Security Specialist about WEP. She said it was because they had been calculating the benefits has if we were low income wage earners. In my case that would be feasible. But would the same not be true for none Civil Servants who just made their 40 quarters. Why does some one works 10 years under Socila Security and never works again get there full amount while someone else does the same plus 30 or more years in another job have theirs slashed. Their justification for WEP is faulty and it needs to be corrected or they need to based on how many quaters you paid into the system.

BTW I got a whopping $230 a month.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
2087
Views
Info Seeker
0
Kudos
2923
Views

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

2,923 Views
Message 14 of 66

I agree.  My husband started his police officer job in the 70's.  The pay was not enough to pay into county pension and opt to pay SS.  Of course the wep law was not in effect.  He has paid into SS well over 90 quarters and still they said he can not draw full amount he is entitled to.  He was retired from police dept in 1989 due to line of duty injury at age 39.  We were not aware of the WEP law untill years later when a friend who worked for post office told us about it.  But my husband has worked part time since his retirement and is still working at age 68 to make ends meet.  He decided to draw his SS a year ago because they said he will not make anymore then what he is drawing now

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
2923
Views
Info Seeker
0
Kudos
2924
Views

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

2,924 Views
Message 15 of 66

My husband is affected by this law which is unfair.  What is the difference between collecting your pension and getting social security different to these people paying into their pension plan but not social security until they retired and worked after retirement with enough quarters paid in.  Why are they penalized and only able to receive 1/3 of what they are entitled to.  My husband could not afford to pay into both and support our family on a police officers pay.  He was forced to retired at age 39 due to an injury.  We could not live off of his disability pebsion and my salary so he went back to work part time (he could not make over his disabilty pension or we would have to pay part of that back to the county he retired from.  He is 68 years old and still needs to work part time so we can make ends meet.  If he were employed in the private sector like I was he would be entitled to receive 900.00 a month SS, but he is only getting 300.00 before part B is taken out.   I am on disability as well and cannot work due to my illness and my medicine is over 10,000 a year.   My Congressman who is Dutch Ruppersburgher said we will not see this unfair bill changed in our lifetime.  Their are enough sponsors and co sponsors for this bill but it never leaves commitee for a vote.  Why dont they just change it to allow people to make what they should be getting even if they are already getting SS but adjust from the time the bill is past and future retirees getting what they rightly deserve.  Many I have talked with said they would be glad if they could draw what they earned and did not care about back monies.  Many police departments have their own pension plans they pay into instead of Social Security but many officers have to work part time jobs to pay their bills.  I do not see how this is different from someone working for a private company, retiring with a pension and getting Social Security.  This law was passed because our law makers did not want these employees double dipping? They are the ones double dipping with what they make and all the perks to go along with it.  How can many law makers enter into politics making very little but when they leave many are millionaires?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
2924
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
3311
Views

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

3,311 Views
Message 16 of 66

@l508156s wrote:

I really like your idea of them refunding what we paid in plus interest. Mine has been collecting interest for over 40 years. That would be a nice payout. 


Woman Wink

My idea was actually the other way, paying in to get the whole benefit rather than getting a refund and cancelling the whole benefit forever.   But what the heck, it should work both ways depending on where one might be in the WEP % reduction web..

 

However, I am afraid that the employers match to what you paid in has already been spent since it is submitted by the employer with no employee identification  - Woman Sad -  your part should have been shown on your W-2.  Add it up, add the appropriate interest ( I can help you find the data, if you want) and ask for that refund and remove yourself from this WEP mess.

 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
3311
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
3314
Views

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

3,314 Views
Message 17 of 66

@l508156s wrote:

The current bill to modify WEP was introduced by Kevin Bray who chairs the Ways and Means committee. Problem with his bill is it does very little to  help those who are already retired. 


I think he has submitted a bill on the WEP every year since about 2014 - must have a thing for it !

But you are right, somebody will always get left out.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
3314
Views
Bronze Conversationalist
0
Kudos
3327
Views

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

3,327 Views
Message 18 of 66

The current bill to modify WEP was introduced by Kevin Bray who chairs the Ways and Means committee. Problem with his bill is it does very little to  help those who are already retired. 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
3327
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
3160
Views

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

3,160 Views
Message 19 of 66

@mommak101 wrote:

The issue is not so much that SS was not withheld from federal/state/etc. pay, but more so that post-retirement work benefits are unfairly targeted.  I am a federal retiree with 30 year civil service under CSRS. 

It is all about the money - where do you think the money that is used to pay benefits comes from?  Your government empoyer decided, probably with your sanction, to pay you a pension rather than to participate in the SS where they would have had to collect the payroll withholding from you and then match those funds. 

 

A government employer does not pay federal income tax - a private employer does have to pay federal income tax and those matched funds are NOT taxed for private employers - therefore the government employer had no inticement to join into the SS system.

 


Since retirement I have been the sole-proprietor of a women-owned small business where I pay both the employee SS contribution AND the employer SS contribution.  The SS Administration provides a table with the "substantial earnings" needed for each year to qualify that year towards the 30 year of substantial earnings.  Interestingly, my 14 years of "substantial earnings"  far exceeds the total of the 30 years in the chart. But that doesn't matter, only that I haven't worked an additional 30 years.

 

That's because a SS benefit is actually figured on the amount of your pay over your entire working career - whether an employee or self-employed.  As a self-employed person you should know that even as an employer - you, under your SS #, are only credited with 1/2 of your total  contribution which is calculated on form SE.  The same way that only an employees contribution are shown on their W-2 because it is the pay amount on which those contribution are based (they have to balance) that is used to figure the benefit when one retires.

 

My SS benefit, earned entirely through my business and separate from my federal retirement, is currently reduced by approximately 32% while I continue to make full SS contributions as the employee and the employer.  These benefits are in no way a "windfall", they are benefits earned by having a business and contributing in accordance with the law. 

In my opinion the WEP is an illegal seizure of earned assets.  Repeal seems to have bi-partisan support, yet the bill never makes it out of committee. 

 

Actually, the "Windfall" is what was eliminated in the "Windfall Elimination Provision" - because of the old, unfair way that the benefits were calculated prior to 1983 - the "double dipping", so to speak.

 

Perhaps the SSA could give all the affected WEP beneficiaries a one time offer of paying ALL of their back payroll taxes and the matched amount since their employer didn't pay it, + interest into the SS system so that you could get the full benefit.  Got that much laying around for this??

 

I have a friend who worked his government job for over 30 years - he made sure that he also had private employment or self-employment income during that time earning the substantial earnings each year, at least, if not more - a few years at the maximum.  When he retired from the government job, he worked several more years self-employed to make sure he was out from under the WEP.  He gets both his pension and his full SS benefit after many years of working and working and working.

 

So keep on working that self-employed job - maybe you will close that WEP % even more.


 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
3160
Views
Bronze Conversationalist
1
Kudos
3066
Views

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

3,066 Views
Message 20 of 66

@nm5358 wrote:

By the way, remember when Congress passed the WEP, raised FICA taxes, and raised the full retirement age, it was done in 1983. This was done by the Democrats and signed into law by Reagan. Thsi was done to "save Social Security and eliminate double dipping with Social Security and a public pension". This was also the year when they made Social Security benefits partially taxable. Thus, you may pay taxes on the same money twice. Once when you earned it, and  again, when you receive Social Security; if your combined retirement income exceeds $25000/year).

 

Never, in any of this, did they opt to eliminate the maximum salary cap subject to FICA. Which, if they did, they did not have to take any of those measures then.

 

The WEP, as what happened to me, still hits people even though they cashed out their public pension years ago, and were not told about teh WEP (that became law in 2005). You are still peanalized, because you did not meet Social Security guidelines for substantial income fro 30 years. This is where it is unfair. I can see it used, for its intendended purpose, reduce Social Security for money recived froma public pension. But, reducing Social Security, when you do not have a pension is a different story altogether.

 

Congress does not want to eliminate WEP, because it is oen way to reduce so called "entitlement spending". They also "borrowed" for years  from the Social Secuirty Trust Fund, and added this to the national debt. This si teh "debt" the GOP talsk about to reduce "entitlement" spending; they do not want to pay  back the IOUs. And, both parties are guoilty of this. EManwhile, Congress gets a generous pension benefit, but they want to wreck Social Security.

 

So, will voting the GOP out, and put Democrats in, get rid of the WEP, and fix SOocial Security? Probably not. Because, if they do, they have to riase txaes to make up for the lost  revenue. Or, do what President Obama was willing to do, used chaines CPI instead of CPI for cost of living increaes. If that were in affect now, instead of getting a 2.8% increase, in 2019, you'd be lucky if you recived a 1% increase (eliminated with the Medicare premium increase).

 

AARP is lobbying againt chained CPI, fortunately, and getting rid of the WEP. The problem is, the millionaire politicians, with their golden pensions, don't care.


The Democrats controlled the House but the Republicans controlled the Senate. It was a bipartisan decision. They were both responsible. Any one who was elected to Congress after 1983 pays Social Security as do all Federal employees hired after 1983. The only ones with a "Golden Pension" are ones who worked 42 years under the Civil Service Retirement System". That includes both Congressmen and employees. Your work that long you get 80% of your 3 highest years of sal;ary. 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
3066
Views