Hundreds of AARP member benefits. One convenient place to explore them. Check it out!

Reply
Bronze Conversationalist
0
Kudos
2082
Views

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

2,082 Views
Message 21 of 66

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. 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
2082
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
1781
Views

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

1,781 Views
Message 22 of 66

@SteveT934531 wrote:

Unfortunately, most of the people who write comments about the unfairness of WEP come to the same conclusion that you and I do which is that all the "good" intentions to rectify this horrible law NEVER get out of committee.  For some reason Bills introduced into Congress go through a similar route, they move on and ultimately are sent to the President for signature and ultimately become law.  It is my firm opinion that the sole reason why legislation aimed at WEP do not move out of committe is because people who serve on these sub-committees simply DON'T WANT them to move forward!  I see the only way those of us who are negatively impacted by this situation is to replace every incumbent we can through the legislative process.  Over time those people who claim to represent us will GET THE MESSAGE.     


It doesn't have anything to do with incumbents - it has to do with money.

Maybe 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, of course + interest into the SS system so that you could get the full benefit and your pension too.  Got that much laying around for this??

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
1781
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
1745
Views

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

1,745 Views
Message 23 of 66

@nm5358 wrote:

 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).

You are forgetting that the employer portion of the payroll tax has never been taxed.  If taxes are paid based on a retirees combined income when they complete their taxes - the amount they pay for this tax goes back into the Social Security Trust fund.

 

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 reason why the cap is there in the 1st place is to correlate it to the MAXIMUM benefit a person can draw.  Remove it and the amount of the MAXIMUM benefit will go up in correlation.  OR are you one that believes that there should be no benefit given for more payroll taxes paid into the system.  If you believe the later, then it will change the SS system to more of a welfare program.

 

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.

What happened to your pension - did you NOT get any benefit from it either monthly or all at once?  Yes, ( Social Security) substantial earnings over a long term will reduce the WEP % reduction.  The closer you are to that 30 years the less your SS benefit is reduced. 

 

Did you NOT know that you were not paying any Social Security payroll taxes in your government job for all the years there????

 

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.

 All the money ever paid into Social Security is accounted for - you can even look at the balance sheets by year if you want.  ALL the money from payroll taxes, all the money from taxes paid on the benefits by beneficiary, interest on those Special Treasuries which is where the money sits when it is not paid out in benefits in the current period.  Less ALL the benefits paid and the Administration cost of running the program.  Congress may get a pension but they also pay into the Social Security system - started at the same time as the WEP and Penion Offset - 1983.

 

Government employees if they want a Social Security benefit based on their work as a government employee with or without private sector work should demand that they be included - but like I said in my other thread on this subject - if you want your pension too then the state may not want to match your SS contributions and keep the pension contribution too.  Perhaps have a 401K - self-funded only and then have the government employer pay their due matched amounts into the SS system in addition to your own.

 

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).

It doesn't matter which party is in charge - the financial problems of Social Security is based on a lot of different problems - too few workers paying into the system, more automation, the huge number of baby boomers hitting the system in a short period of time (somewhat planned for) who are living longer and longer (Not really planned for in the numbers)- It will have to be a bipartisan effort with compromise to fix it - as was done by President Ronald Reagan and Speaker of the House, Tip O'Neill back in 1983.

 

The chained CPI has grown more slowly than the traditional CPI by an average of about 0.25 percentage points over the past decade. If the chained CPI were implemented, Social Security benefits would be about $3 per month lower in 2014, and about $30 a month lower by 2023, according to Congressional Budget Office calculations. And by 2033, Social Security payments are projected to be 3 percent lower than they would be using the current measure of inflation.

 

https://money.usnews.com/money/retirement/articles/2013/04/29/how-the-chained-cpi-affects-social-sec...

 

Course, there are some that would prefer using an "elderly index" reflecting more in the medical cost which seniors have more that others.

 

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.


Last I looked it was a Republican that had introduced bills to recalculate the WEP - it will never be done away with - changed maybe.

 

Maybe 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, of course + interest into the SS system so that you could get the full benefit.  Got that much laying around for this??

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
1745
Views
Conversationalist
0
Kudos
831
Views

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

831 Views
Message 24 of 66

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.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
831
Views
Conversationalist
0
Kudos
826
Views

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

826 Views
Message 25 of 66

Agree with your conclusion.  Our "power" lies in our votes, so EVERYONE needs to exercise their right to VOTE this Tuesday!

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
826
Views
Info Seeker
0
Kudos
515
Views

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

515 Views
Message 26 of 66

Unfortunately, most of the people who write comments about the unfairness of WEP come to the same conclusion that you and I do which is that all the "good" intentions to rectify this horrible law NEVER get out of committee.  For some reason Bills introduced into Congress go through a similar route, they move on and ultimately are sent to the President for signature and ultimately become law.  It is my firm opinion that the sole reason why legislation aimed at WEP do not move out of committe is because people who serve on these sub-committees simply DON'T WANT them to move forward!  I see the only way those of us who are negatively impacted by this situation is to replace every incumbent we can through the legislative process.  Over time those people who claim to represent us will GET THE MESSAGE.     

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
515
Views
Conversationalist
0
Kudos
781
Views

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

781 Views
Message 27 of 66

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.  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.

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. 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
781
Views
Conversationalist
0
Kudos
1209
Views

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

1,209 Views
Message 28 of 66

From 1996 - 2002, I worked at a state university, which had me pay into the state pension plan. When I left employment, I cashed out the pension plan and gave up all rights to a state pension. Yesterday, I was informed, by Socil Social Security, I was subject to WEP for those six years, reducing my monthly benefit by about $35/month. Fortunately I had 29 of 30 years minimum income. And, in the 30th year (my first year of employemnt), I was short $1400 to meet the minimum. Thus, I must accept a life long penalty of reduced beenfits, on money I no longer have. I was unemployed, during the 9/11 recession, hence why the pension was cahed in.

 

In 2005, Congress changed the law, that now requires the state pension authorities to inform people if they cash out the pension, and expect to only receve Social Security. This was not the case in 2002.

 

This is a ticking time bomb for people who worked in both the private and public sector, thinking that if the no longer have a state pension, they will not be subjected to WEP. It turns out they are.

 

While $35/month is not going to break me financially, it is just a penalty. A penalty similar to having to pay income taxes on 50% of Social Security benefits received in a given year. And, if you think Republicans are responsible, think again, A Democrat Congress passed this, and Reagan sign d it into law. This was doen at teh same time to riase FICA and to gradually raise the full retirement age, from 65 to 67, for those born after 1954. Thus, reducing benefits even more; in my case, anotehr $100 a month or so.

 

Considering the current political climate, it is doubtful WEP will be repealed, and that they will implement Social Security cuts, raise the retirement age, and used chained CPI to determin COLA, sending millions into poverty. Neither party's politician care, as they are multi-millionaires and have their own golden pensiosn and health care fro life.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
1209
Views
Bronze Conversationalist
1
Kudos
1786
Views

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

1,786 Views
Message 29 of 66

@GailL1 wrote:

@jfgcantuaarp wrote:

Total elimination with back pay would be the only fix.  I do agree with the Social Security assessment. I was not asked if I received a government pension and was told my SS pension would be a lot more then I expected ( i was aware of the WEP). I had to tell the representative and she had to go ask someone else.  


This should not even be an issue anymore - at least not for State and Local Government Employees.  Shouldn't be any different for civilian federal employees either.  The whole thing comes down to whether or not your wages while working were within the Social Security system and thus had SS payroll taxes withheld and matched by the employer.  IF NOT, your wages under that condition should not be included in the SS benefit computation.

 

https://www.ssa.gov/planners/retire/stateandlocal.html

 

State And Local Government Employment

Work for a state or local government agency, including a school system, college or university, may or may not be covered by Social Security.

 

If you are covered by both your state or local pension plan and Social Security, you pay Social Security and Medicare taxes just as you would for any other Social Security covered job. You will see your earnings on your record.

 

If you are covered only by your state or local pension plan,

You don't pay Social Security taxes and your earnings won't be on your Social Security record. (Your record will, however, show your Medicare wages if you pay into that program.)


Your pension from non covered state or local government employment may affect the amount of your

Social Security benefit and
Social Security benefit as a spouse.

 

We cannot go back to the old way because the computation was wrong and it was "double dipping" because of how the formula was written.

 

ALL employees should be within the Social Security system - the only reason some are not in this case is that governments don't want to have to match their employee SS payroll withholding and employees don't want to pay them either.

 

You don't get the benefit if you don't play by the rules.


It should not be an issue for anyone who started working when the law was in affect. It is a major issue for those of us who paid into Social Security for years before the bill was passed. Your opinion why some state governments do not want to pay into Social Security is illogocical since most of them already match your pension withholding. If I had worked a full time job for 20 years prior to 1984 and found out I was only getting 40% of my Social Security I would be livid. 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
1786
Views
Bronze Conversationalist
1
Kudos
1786
Views

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

1,786 Views
Message 30 of 66

U.S. Representative Kevin Brady (R-TX) who chairs the U.S. House Ways and Means Committee, along with Ranking Member Richard Neal (D-MA), has introduced H.R. 6933 to amend Title II of the Social Security Act. The bill would replace the windfall elimination provision (WEP) with a formula equalizing benefits for certain individuals with non-covered employment.

For me the problem with his bill is it does not really help those who paid into SS for years before WEP became law. It only affects those who  are first eligible to retire in 2024 or later. Anyone else would get either a $50 or $100 monthly rebate. They claim it would be too expensive to reclculate everyones Social Security. Back paying everone affect by WEP would bankrupt SS but recalculating

the benefits should not be that costly. They do make software programs that could do it.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
1786
Views