The Social Security Administration’s Windfall Elimination Provision

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 and have been saving enough for retirement on your own, but in case you are… plan ahead and beware of this provision. Wouldn’t it be great if you saved too much for retirement?

Author: Jeremy Vohwinkle

My name is Jeremy Vohwinkle, and I’ve spent a number of years working in the finance industry providing financial advice to regular investors and those participating in employer-sponsored retirement plans.

108 comments
Geri Murphy
Geri Murphy

How do we start a class action law suit to get the act rescinded and people get their due social security?

chachabelle
chachabelle

Does anyone know which states do NOT enforce the Windfall Provision Elimination?  i believe New Hampshire is one of them

Susanmsp
Susanmsp

My husband worked for a company that paid into a pension instead of social security. The ex-wife was awarded 100% of the pension. Husband has started drawing social security retirement and a taxes are being taken out of his check (windfall elimination provision). There is nothing in the QDRO that states he is to pay these taxes. What are his options?

MJ
MJ

I worked for a large bank for 17 years until they closed my business unit and for different companies over 5 years before that.  All the while I paid into social security.  Since I have a teaching degree I was thinking of hiring on with a local school however, after learning about WEP am wondering if I should look somewhere else for employment. 

What I know is the 17 year company is going to pay me a pension of 800.00 or so dollars at 65 and I was thinking I would also get 100% of my social security benefits.  What I don't know is if I work for the state (teaching) for the next 20 years, how will that affect me?  How can I find out?  

RicRobson
RicRobson

ricrobson@yahoo.com

Ric Robson

I've spoken with Roger Moore, the Nebraska attorney who won the Petersen v. Michael Astrue case.

 

I have an extensive employment background in pensions, actuarial science, computerized pension administration, pension plan legal text writing, accounting and trust fund accounting, and I have more than a little experience in writing legal Pension Plan Documents.

 

And, I've read the relevant section of Title 42 regarding WEP.

 

1)  WEP CANNOT BE APPLIED to anyone whose "alien" (foreign service) social security pensions are covered by an International Agreement on Pensions ("totalization" agreements) ... of which there are about 23 nations in agreement...

2)  WEP itself in my opinion is illegal... no matter WHO the applicant petitioner might be ... The Federal Government DOES NOT FUND Social Security Pensions ... the funding comes from employee FICA contributions (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) AND a payroll tax levied on the employers.  These monies are deducted from EARNED INCOME.  The Federal Government BORROWS the SS Pension Funds at extremely low rates of interest ... IN RETURN FOR ITS PROMISE / INSURANCE to maintain the solvency of the plan during any cyclical period when claims might exceed annual pension/premium receipts...

3)  WEP was introduced as a modification to the Social Security Benefit Formula ... BUT DID NOT MAKE ANY ALLOWANCE FOR REFUNDS in the event of an offset ... THEREBY CONVERTING AN INSURANCE PREMIUM to a DIRECT INCOME TAX ...

 

... BUT IT WAS NEVER PRESENTED TO CONGRESS AS AN AMENDMENT TO INCOME TAX ACT ...

 

Any insurer who collects and retains an insurance premium for a "benefit" that the insurer KNOWS IT WILL NEVER PAY ... is guilty of INSURER FRAUD ... plain and simple ...

 

Demonstration on point:   Whenever an individual changes jobs between social security covered employment, he/she will pay social security FICA premiums in both jobs ... BUT RECEIVE A REFUND of the overpayment when they file his/her annual information/income tax return ...

 

The Social Security Administration has been fraudulently collecting and retaining FICA premiums since the very early 1980's ...

 

The accumulated actuarial value of this fraud is likely $80 - $90 Billion dollars at this point, and is increasing at $4 - $6 Billions per year...

 

AND where 2,000,000 people are currently being shorted on their pensions, the states in which they live have been shorted critical revenues to the states ... with respect to cash infusion to the private sector economies AND WITH RESPECT to potential income taxes that the states would otherwise have collected...

 

THIS SITUATION IS SO SIMPLE ... (but "overwhelming" in its accumulated amount !) that I've got to believe that SSA's Chief Actuary, who was employed at the time of WEP implementation, certainly knew of the legal fallacy of WEP ... and it seems SO SIMPLE that those in the Regan Administration at the time, WOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THE DAY WOULD COME when someone would put it all together...

 

But now the financial "time bomb" might mean to some that Social Security must be terminated as "unsustainable" (the Regan / Republican objective all along !!!!!!!)

 

... but here's the point:   Social Security Pension Trust Funds are over 20 years away from even needing the short term solvency assurance of the Federal Government... and, even then the actuarial estimates are that the solvency assistance will only be required for about 8 years...

 

The stupidity of this mess is that if we get even 2% of the current 18% unemployed back to work, and grow the numbers of employed participants by 2% per year, the SSA "funding dilemma" goes away forever !!!!!!!

 

So let's not allow the Repbulicans to panic us ... Let's just get back to work...

 

And, by-the-way, if my appeal isn't granted, I will bring a class action lawsuit, in pro per (just try and get a lawyer to take this on... Roger Moore didn't want it !!!!!)

 

My e-mail is ricrobson@yahoo.com    ... feel free to contact me.

 

Sincerely,

 

Ric Robson

 

Larry Slattery
Larry Slattery

FYI: I have replied to the email in the previous post on 3/20/2012 but have not received a reply.

Roger1501
Roger1501

My name is Roger Moore, I'm an attorney in Nebraska.  I have fought these issues for quasi-military employees in Nebraska.  Petersen v. Astrue was decided several years go by the 8th Circuit and found the WEP did not apply based on the rationale SSA tried to set forth.  You can and should appeal the determination when you receive the notice.  I have considered filing a class action as the WEP applies to dual-status military technicians and also individuals who move to the U.S. from another country with pension recognition agreement with the U.S.  Feel free to contact me at rmoore@rehmlaw.com.

 

Larry Slattery
Larry Slattery

Are there any EU expats on here who have been hit by the WEP willing to organize? If so, please email me on slats@neo.rr.com. Lets explore the options open to us.

carlton
carlton

I was a firefighter for over 25 years. In addition to that I have worked for 48 years on other jobs paying into social security. Because I worked an average of 70 hours a week for 42 years I am losing half of my social security because of WEP. Reagan keeps on hosing me even after he is gone.

Elena J
Elena J

So how do we overturn it?

Jesse Howell
Jesse Howell

The so-called windfall for teachers is a cruel joke. President Reagan was no intellectual, nor saint, nor prophet; however, with this provision he sent back the teaching civil service into a tailspin that has not recovered, nor will recover anytime soon--and hopeful Obama is no help either. He still can't find his flashlight.

Steven Newland
Steven Newland

Look in to your Congress and Senators to find out which ones are pro WEP and GPO and rally to defeat them when its election time.

pamela silvestro
pamela silvestro

this is so unfair! both myself and my husband are affected. friend said he was "grandfathered" and does receive both???? what year is that??? thank you.

Elena J
Elena J

Check again, you will probably loose 60% of your US social security. Calculate how much money you would take in during the interim, by way of each of the alternatives. By deferring, would you recuperate what you didn't take in, that is, delay it? Or would it be forfeited? I have no possibility like this in the Italian pension system. Lucky you.

J Fradenburg
J Fradenburg

I have been drawing a pension from the UK since I was 60yrs old. I am now eligible for SS from the US (Where I worked for 25 yrs) I have just applied and have been told that I will lose 50%. Unfortunatly I can't draw on my ex husbands SS because my contributions are just over 50% of his. I have just found out that I can defer my UK pension and add around 10.04% for every year that I do so, or I have the option to take a lump sum any time after 12 months which will earn 2% over the bank rate. I think this is a better deal than leaving the US pension until I'm 70 and, until I draw my uk pension again I won't be subject to the WEP

joe bogowski
joe bogowski

It is estimated that the United States is going to spend over 4 Trillion Dollars on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - and that doesn't include the cost of rebuilding those rat-hole countries. Meanwhile, the government says it can't afford to pay Earned Social Security Benefits to seniors effected by WEP & GPO because it would cost 62 Billion Dollars over a ten year period. What is wrong with this country?

Stu Migdol
Stu Migdol

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!!

Ed McClain
Ed McClain

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.

Joan Stirrup
Joan Stirrup

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.

Robert Benson
Robert Benson

Helen:

Go to 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.

Helen Gedraitis
Helen Gedraitis

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.

Leta W.
Leta W.

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.

marie m
marie m

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 !!!!!!!!

Robert Benson
Robert Benson

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).

Dave H
Dave H

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?

hkchildress@sbcglobal.net
hkchildress@sbcglobal.net

"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.

Bill
Bill

Considering the vulgarity - screwed and blue is overpaid.

Bill
Bill

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

barry painter
barry painter

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!

Screwed and Blue
Screwed and Blue

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.

Screwed and Blue
Screwed and Blue

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!!

Ray Fantini
Ray Fantini

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.

Robert Benson
Robert Benson

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 www.fedbens.us ?

Good luck!

Jim Haskins
Jim Haskins

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!

Narendra Utukuri
Narendra Utukuri

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

Norm Todd
Norm Todd

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.

Robert Benson
Robert Benson

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.

Joyce Guerra
Joyce Guerra

I recently read that Congress was working on appealing the WEP provision. I would like an update on just what progress is being made on repealing this provision.

David Hatton
David Hatton

Two issues: 1st, it is my understanding that when the congress at that time, in 1986, passed the WEC, they exempted themselves from the provision. 2nd, there are numerous spouses who never paid a dime into the SS system, generally immigrants because they married a US citizen, who can collect 1/2 of their deceased spouse's intitlement. Maybe I just do not get it. I worked 43 quarters before taking a federal government position. Because it was a covered position, law enforcement, I was forced to retire at the age of 57. Yes, with a government pension that I and other federal government employees enjoy, yet we also contributed to this retirement plan. Now that I no longer can work for the agency because of the forced retirement, I have to pay fully into the SS system, if I choose to work, and will receive about 60% of what I would normally be intitled to if I was not subject to the WEC.

JO ANN JACKSON
JO ANN JACKSON

I as a civil service employee would like to see that WEP lifted for the simple reason that i worked and paid into social security. my salary will be cut almost in half. I have to help my mom, who is 84 years old and it is rough the way the economy is now. I feel like,i am entitled to my social security also.

somnolence
somnolence

Did any of you whiners put any money away in regular savings aside from pensions, etc. I sure as hell have. I'm 55 and I'm not worrying about a thing with the house paid off long ago and all. My wife is still working, getting a salary, and drawing a pension from the state. Regular bank account savings on a consistent level, supplementing your iras and pensions is the key.

Harry Childress
Harry Childress

What part of "my money" that went into the Social Security Administrations Account, is so hard to understand. What part of "I paid for it, I should get it" is hard to understand. Retirement under Social Security was not intended to be a sole source of retirement income.

dandy
dandy

I did not say that the employee had the choice to opt in or out. I merely said that opt out was voluntary. Your employer, or your decision to not work under the soc sec system made that decision for you. In doing so, a great benefit was given to you by not mandatorily having to pay into soc sec. That is the windfall that you received. If you take the amount of taxes into the soc sec that you did not pay, plus a bond return on investment that you could have gotten by investing that amount far outweighs the amount that you lost through wep. Why is this windfall so hard to understand?? Once again I will state. I wish that I had not been required to pay into the soc sec system. I would have taken that amount and invested it and retired even earlier than I actually did.

Harry Childress
Harry Childress

To Ed Miller,
I totally agree with what you wrote to "Dandy". But, unless the Social Security Administration has recently reversed past decision, you cannot participate into SSI and a second plan at the same time. You can re-enter the Social Security Plan after you leave the latter employer's plan. I have also been advised that Opting in or out is not an individual option,unless possibly you can do so as a private contractor.

I can only hope that Congress sees the light and decides to leave the "dark side.
Harry at hkchildress@sbcglobal.net

Ed Miller
Ed Miller

Dandy, I think you need to check your facts & try to get them right. I had no chance to opt in or out of S.S. My employer told me they did not pay into S.S. & I could pay into it myself while working for them. I worked long enough to get $610.00 a month from S.S. & when I retired & filed for my S.S., I was told by S.S. that due to the WEP, I could only get $359.00. I'm not asking for anything I don't deserve, just what I earned. If you had any sense,you would not run your mouth about something you don't know anything about!!!!!

dandy
dandy

Your example neglects to state that the opt out of social security was voluntary. A request had to be made to opt out. Secondly, there had to be a secondary plan into which the monies that would have been paid into soc sec would be paid. Most often these plans worked much like a cash plan and you could invest the monies yourself. The REAL problem is that most individuals having access to the second plan monies before social security age retirement spend it in lump sum payouts, or do not annuatize the monies in the second plan. Besides, it is hard to feel sorry for someone complaining about a maximum reduction of less than $300, when they very likely had monies invested in another plan worth far greater than the lost wep. My spouse is affected by the wep and the money in the second plan is worth far more than the soc sec benfit lost. Sorry, I don't feel sympathy for you complainers who are not looking at the entire situation.

Harry Childress
Harry Childress

The Windfall Elimination Provision of Social Security is not only unfair it is, as far as I am concerned, criminal. It takes away personal property without compensation.
In other words lets say a worker purchased retirement income from one source by paying into an account for lets say, a total of 10 years (40 quarters) . At some time in the middle of those years, the worker discontinues paying into the first account, and pays into a second retirement source. The worker pays into the account for the required number of years to qualify for the retirement plan.
When the worker decides to retire, the worker finds that some elected officials have decide to penalize the worker for having two plans or two bank accounts for his retirement plan.
I would like to know the legal basis to take away property from one person by a law, and yet exempt others, by the way, the exemption extends to the same public officials who mastered the WEP Provision.

Barry
Barry

The Windfall Profit Elimination Provision enacted during Reagan under the premise that Civil Service employees was double dipping was mutted by the fact that "good ole" Ronnie got a Federal, State of California, Screen Actors Guild Pension, Social Security, etc... when he left office.
Guess it was ok for him! The Reagan administration was the #1 hypocritical admin until George W. Bush came along. The jury will be out for several years on Obama until his admin comes to an end. Obama pledged to eliminate the Windfall Profite Elimination Provision. We will see?????

Screwed and Blue
Screwed and Blue

Excuse me? YOUR tax dollars? Where do you get off saying that? I'm an American Citizen and have paid Income tax all my life, including while living overseas. The fact that I live overseas does not negate any of my rights or obligations as an American Citizen. The SS benefits I am FULLY entitled to are based on covered income from 32 years of working IN the U.S.A. for which I paid SS and income tax. So I am entitled to them because I earned them by the sweat of my labor just like anyone else. Did you work for my money? NO!! I did! Your sorry butt had nothing to do with it, so get out of my face! Similarly, my son, for your information, is as much a U.S. citizen as you, and BY LAW is entitled to Family Benefits based on my SS benefits because when you retire your dependent children are entitled to them. It doesn't matter where he lives--he's a citizen and he gets them.

Furthermore, I have never been a public employee. I have always worked in the private sector, even as a teacher, so that other crap you're spouting has nothing to do with me. If you had bothered to read my posts you would know that my pension is not funded by you or any other U.S. taxpayer but comes from the Social Security fund of the country I reside in, because I paid into it and have earned it with my tax monies here. But anyway, the pensions the other people on here are talking about were funded by them too since they paid taxes, so they are entitled to them too.

As to President Obama (I assume that is who you are referring to) he just got elected, so how could he have had anything to do with either the SSA, Massachusetts, or any other of your paranoid fantasies?

Johnny Cracker
Johnny Cracker

I've brought some cheese so all you whiners can share...Why is screwed and blued child receiving my tax dollars overseas? Since HUSSEIN has taken over all I see is "what I'm entitled to..." and "waahh - I was a teacher and ONLY received 40% of SS" etc..How much is your taxpayer funded pension? In the most vile and corrupt state in the nation, MASSACHUSETTS, the public hacks receive 80% of their TOP 3 YEARS plus health insurance at the taxpayers cost. They (read that corrupt DEMOCRATS) have their little games to ensure they maximize their pensions (look up the former MA speaker of the House, the corrupt midget Billy Bulger - brother of convicted serial killer Whitey Bulger and member of the FBI's most wanted list, just one example). I am so tired of public employees wanting more and more because they are entitled. This is what HUSSEIN has brought this country....