The Social Security Administration’s Windfall Elimination Provision

This is a guest post by Tanesha Morgan, writer for Personal Finance Analyst. Personal Finance Analyst is an online community of bloggers dedicated to taking the mystery out of money and helping you to live a happier, more successful life with the money you have.

The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) has been around since the Regan Administration, but most people never learn about this provision until it is too late.  The WEP is a provision in the Social Security law that serves to prevent retirees from getting a “windfall” of money from the federal government.  I’ll get back to the term windfall in a moment.  But first… how does this provision work?

The formula used to calculate a person’s social security benefit is based of several factors, but I’ll try to use a simplified scenario.  If a person paid social security taxes for 25 years, then he may be eligible for 90% of his average monthly earning.  However, if that person is subject to the WEP, he’d only be eligible for 40% of his benefits.

Who is Usually Affected by This Provision?

Generally, people who have made career changes will be affected… if that change involves moving from a social security covered position to a non social security covered position.

For example a teacher … public school teachers in many states contribute to a state or local government retirement system and are exempt from paying social security taxes.  But if after 20 years (which is long enough to be eligible for the state or local government retirement benefit), our teacher may decide that he wants a career change.

He moves on to a position which is covered Social Security.  If he stays in that position for about 10 years, then he is eligible for Social Security benefits.

Fast forward to our teacher’s 62nd birthday… he goes down to the Social Security office to apply for his Social Security benefits.  The worker figures out his benefit and then informs him that that benefit is going to be reduced nearly 50% because he is already receiving a retirement pension from another government.

This reduction prevents our teacher from getting a “windfall” of money from the government.  Windfall… I really have an issue with that term.  So instead of him being about to buy 2 loaves of bread with his social security check, he can only buy 2 slices.  **shaking my head**… Windfall?!? Give me a break!

I think this WEP is completely unfair.  If a person has worked long and hard enough to be eligible for two government pensions… then why should he be punished?  He earned the pension… so give it to him.  Two government pension checks do not equate to a windfall… no matter how you add it up.

For those non-Social Security covered state and local government employees, the WEP acts an inhibitor… preventing them from moving into private sector jobs.

Well, I suppose it only inhibits those who are aware.  Most people are not even aware that this provision exists.   Many first learn about it when they apply for their Social Security benefits… which by this time is too late because they have not planned for this benefit reduction.

Just about every year, one or two bills are proposed to Congress that would repeal this WEP… but every year it is either not heard or voted down.

The WEP has been in law more than 20 years, so chances are it will not disappear.  Therefore I thought it was important to alert my fellow financially conscious friends that this provision exists.  Hopefully, you aren’t depending on Social Security to take care of you during retirement, but in case you are… plan ahead and beware of this provision.


Related posts:

  1. Understanding Social Security Disability Benefits – Who’s Eligible and How it Works
  2. Where Do Your Social Security Tax Dollars Go?
  3. Poll: What Will be the Status of Social Security When You Retire?
  4. How Will The Automatic Enrollment Provision Of The Pension Protection Act Help Individuals Save For Retirement?
  5. Administration Brings Back One-Year Treasury Bill

Filed Under: Odds and Ends

About the Author: Jeremy Vohwinkle is a Chartered Retirement Planning Counselor® and spent a few years working as a financial planner. Today, he helps people make the most of their money by writing about personal finance here and About.com. Jeremy is also a community editor at Bundle and a regular contributor for other publications such as the U.S. News, Intuit, and American Express. Be sure to follow Jeremy on Twitter.

RSSComments (74)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. If we have to have WEP, then at least we should also have really good software for figuring out exactly how much the WEP reduction is – the Social Security site does NOT have such a tool.

    Check out fedbens.us – you will find it is friendly, helpful, and 100% accurate.

  2. Norm Todd says:

    I worked for my father from the time I was 12 years old. He was a great believer in social security. He put in maximum social security for me and my brothers even though at that time we did not need to because our wages were not that much. As a young adult I worked 16 years as a truck driver. I injured my back and at age 33 I was 100% disabled and never able to return to my job. The disability gave me 200.00 a month for about a year until I was able to walk on my own. At this time I decided to go back to school to become a teacher. I asked Social Security if they could help with my books and tuition. The person that was over my case literally laughed in my face and stated I had too much in savings and too much invested in my home to qualify for SSDI. He stated if I had worked my same job for that length of time and misspent my monies then and I had no savings then SSDI would have been able to help me. My wife and I struggled and I competed my college with a teaching credential. I worked for 23 years as a teacher and retired only to find out that I would be unable to collect my full social security. I could have went to worked for other companies who had their own retirement and been able to collect a full SSI and the companies retirement. If I would have been informed before I became a teacher of the later consequences I would have chosen a different field. I do want to state I am not dependent on SSI. I don’t care what your retirement status is but rather I feel everyone who has contributed to SSI should be reimbursed for what they contributed. An injustice has been done not only to me but many others including those who are currently paying in to SSI with no real faith that they will ever receive anything for their monies.

  3. Narendra Utukuri says:

    Can any one throw some light on working in a different country like Canada. I worked in Canada until 1997. I moved to the U S in 1997 and became a citzen in 2007. I have been receiving pensions from Canadian Govt. for which I paid my taxes in canada. I am also including that amount in Tax return for the U S. I applied for my SSA benefit from the U S and they are considering my Canadian pensions as windfall income and cut down my benefit. My question is I was in Canada long before I moved to the U S. I was not evena Green card holder of U S.

    I feel that the rule is being applied to me unjustly. Is there any way I can appeal and get this reverted.

    Thanks,
    Narendra Utukuri

  4. Jim Haskins says:

    As a public school teacher I’m subject to WEP. In calculating my “substantial earnings” according to SSA I found that I was $400.00 short for 1966. Here’s the rub, for all of 1966 I was in the Army having been drafted in 1965. Part of 1966 I was in Vietnam. SSA is telling me that the Army did not pay me enough in 1966 to count towards my SS benefit. That one year makes a 5% difference. Totally unfair!

  5. RE: Jim Haskins

    First, did you know that for military service prior to 1977 or so, Social Security is required to give you additional earnings credits? It really makes a difference – for me, the extra credits gave me $100 more per month.
    Second, did you know there is a truly excellent software calculator for the WEP, at http://www.fedbens.us ?

    Good luck!

  6. Ray Fantini says:

    Why should a person be penalized by WEP if he or she works for a private company in the USA and in a foreign country.Dosen’t that individual pay funds into social security and a private pension in a foreign country.That individual has paid into a system where taxes are deducted and calculated for the correct amount one will receive when retired. Particularly in Europe, it is based on a contribution basis. Why should social security become involved where he has no right. Is the US system based on charity or based on what one has put into the system. Why should they think they have the right to interfere in the rights of individuals because they’ve lived in a foreign country.Perhaps it’s time we look more closely into what are legislators are earning instead of robbing the poor. No one is looking for a handout. We are all trying to survive an already difficult economy. Every cent we earn is needed to survive with dignity.

  7. Screwed and Blue says:

    It beats me Ray. That’s what they’ve done to me when in fact the bi-lateral treaty they have signed with the European country I live in has stipulations that make it so you don’t have to pay double taxes, i.e. be taxed on your income over here in the U.S. unless it is over $80,000, and you don’t have to pay SSI tax in both places. Ostensibly the idea of the treaty and certainly the implication or message it sends is that your SS payments here are all you need to get your SS benefits in the U.S. In fact they are supposed to combine the two and give you one payout in either country depending on which you live in, the USA or the foreign country. But there is an inexplicable catch—if you have enough credits to get the minimun benefit in the US and the minimum pension here, then you can’t combine the credits and have to collect each payment separately. It is this separate payment of my pension here that suddenly makes my practically minimum pension here a “windfall” which they have reduced by half. Goddamn them, because I am just scraping by, and if it weren’t for the fact that my wife is from here, younger than me, and still working, I would be living under a bridge or a flophouse what with the cost off living here and the economic crisis. Windfall my ass!! Fucking Crooks!!

  8. Screwed and Blue says:

    I forgot to mention, that if they had some kind of warning for people like me about this, I would have paid into US SS to get the additional credits necessary to not be affected by WEP. But they don’t want you to know so they can hit you over the head when it is too late and keep half of the benefits you worked for and are entitled to, and thus enrich themselves with higher salaries and pork barrel projects for their cronies. I’d like to see one of those crooks in Washington try and live on the pittance they have reduced me to. Fuck em all is what I say.

  9. barry painter says:

    To all the do gooders who say people want their cake and eat it too: Anyone else in this country can draw their pension(s) from their private employers and get their full social security checks!
    In fact Ronald Reagan (the man who signed this discriminatory law into being) got his full Social Security, State of California, Federal Pension, Screen Actors Guild Pension, etc… (Nacncy continues to draw these to this day).
    Typical Republican bullshit!

  10. Bill says:

    Barry Democrats passed the law and refuse to repeal not the Republicans.

  11. Bill says:

    Considering the vulgarity – screwed and blue is overpaid.

  12. hkchildress@sbcglobal.net says:

    “pays to live green” said “GovEmployee” makes a good point that they are not actually paying into social security so why would you receive the full benefits? But they both neglected (either un-intentionally or on purpose)to mention that most of the people complaining are those who paid into the Social Security System for 10 to 15 years! They are receiving only 40% of the benefit they paid for!
    Everyone likes to forget that Social Security is supplemental payment, not a retirement. It was always intended that a retiree have other sources of income. I had savings, PERS, and Social Security. This is exactly what Social Security was intended for. They actually described it like the “three legged bar stool”. I f you remove any one leg the retirement plan would be difficult. For me they took most of the third leg away, so they could have that money for all those whinney Democrats who wish to provide for all those residents who never had a job, don’t want a job, and expect free health care because they are “entitled” to everything for free.

  13. Dave H says:

    I’ve paid into SS for over 20 years, both before and after working in a government non-SS taxed career. At 20 years, twice the required time for SS qualification/vesting, I can draw a whopping 40% of my earned benefit. If I work for 30 years, THREE TIMES the required minimum for benefits, I still can only max out at 90% of my earned, I say EARNED, beneft. The clarification in CAPS is for you boneheads out there who still don’t get the part where the “guvment” TOOK my SS money and kept it, returning 40% of a benefit I PAID for. It was a clar case of robbing form a small body of people, relatively speaking, and spending it where “they” wanted. Why should they care? too few votes to matter……that is why this country was based on a Republic, not a Democracy. Whne 6 out of 10 people vote to steal form the minority 4……….get my drift?

  14. Dave H., it is not as bad as it seems. The 90% vs. 40% does not – repeat NOT – refer to your whole earned benefit. It refers to just the first tier, with the second and third tiers unaffected.

    A good explanation, and a good calculator, are at my web site: fedbens.us (click #8 on the menu).

  15. marie m says:

    If aperson pays into SS why should they be penalized because they also worked a job that had a private pension fund, The money that a person paid into SS should not be denied!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it is theirs!!!!!!! Please some one out there please reintroduce the elimination of this unfair practice !!!!!!!!

  16. Leta W. says:

    Is it possible to sue the Federal Government for stealing our SS retirement? I think we should organize and see if we can take this to the Supreme Court if necessary. Do you think we could create a ‘class action suit’?

    I don’t have any faith in our so called leaders to repeal this unfair law. It has been dragging on too long and the repeals just stay in committee because they don’t intend to get them out of committee and vote on them. As long as it doesn’t cost them any of theirs they think it is okay to take ours.

    So we need to try something else and bypass them. If you have any new ideas I would appreciate your comments.

  17. Helen Gedraitis says:

    I am outraged. I am 61 years old, planning retirment in the coming years. When I do retire, I will have worked for the state for maybe 15 years. This will give me a SMALL govt. pension. What is killing me is all of my life (since age 16) I have paid into social security. I worked as a professional, but low salary jobs for most of it. So, now when I retire, my SS will be cut simply because the last working years were for govt. This is a horrible outrage.! People in the private sector who get a privat pension from a company, and then go nto public service, don’t have any cuts in pensions…..why am I punished for serving my entire years for the public??
    (teaching, human services, educational counseling). This HAS TO CHANGE to be fair. Helen G.

  18. Helen:

    Go to http://www.fedbens.us and click on #8. You will find it is an excellent explanation of, and calculator for, the Windfall Elimination Provision.
    WEP provides for “small” govt pensions by being limited to one half the govt. pension. For example, if your WEP reduction would ordinarily be, say, $345, but your govt pension is only $500, the WEP reduction will be held to just $250.
    Maybe it is not as bad as you think. Good luck.

  19. Joan Stirrup says:

    The WEP Law is so unfair. I’ve worked for 43 years in three different countries (the UK, Canada and the USA, having mandatory social security taxes taken from each pay check in each country. I now get social security retirement benefits from all three countries, based on my years of work in each country. The only country who penalizes me for receiving a pension from the others is the USA under the WEP provision. The amount the US Social Security Administration stated I would be entitled to upon retirement based on my earnings (and social security taxes taken from each paycheck) was $319/month (based on 10 years or 40 quarters). This was reduced to $141/month because of the WEP provision. My other two pensions help, but certainly would not allow me to live the high life. And, yes, I did also save privately for my retirement thank God. The point is how can the US penalize me for earnings in other countries on which I paid that country’s social security taxes? I wasn’t even a US Citizen at the time. I don’t think this law makes any sense and I hate the implication that the benefits I have earned by paying taxes is a “windfall” of any kind. I submitted a Request for Reconsideration with my reasons and, after 8 months received a reply stating that “our first decision was correct.” I’ve since discovered – not from Social Security – that, apparently even though I worked 10 years in the US and earned retirement benefits, if I did not work a total of 30 years in the US, then WEP will still be applied. I rather like the suggestion of a class action suite.

  20. Ed McClain says:

    WEP appears to only impact government retirees. Rail Road retirees were not required to pay into SS either. However,it appears there is no penalty on their SS annuity if they have one in addition to their RR retirement. WEP discriminates againist government imployees only. Money paid into the civil service retirement system was a “retirement fund” and technically payments were/are supported by that fund and are NOT from the Federal Treasury. This fund is only administered by the Federal Government.

  21. Stu Migdol says:

    I worked for the government for 20 years and I paid a FULL share into their MANDATORY retirement system. I ALSO worked for 20 years and paid a FULL SHARE into the MANDATORY social security system. I AM ENTITLED to a FULL SHARE of MY rightfully earned social security benefits!!! All of you affected by this VERY UNFAIR provision should start speaking up NOW to your congressmen and senators. Someone out there should start a CLASS ACTION SUIT for those of us being SCREWED!!

Leave a Reply




If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar.

Get my FREE Invest Like a Pro eBook and email updates today: