[CoachKandSportsguy]

Senate passes Social Security bill to repeal WEP and GPO

Not sure what this means, other than more people can collect, and that means the insolvency is now approaching sooner.

Lets hope the Congress can fix social security without all the continuing resolutions to fix the debt ceiling and the budget ever increasing spending

good luck to us!

[retiredguy123]

If this law is enacted, I may be able to receive a spouse benefit from my ex-spouse's work record. This is based on the GPO (Government Pension Offset) rule that has totally eliminated my spouse benefit since I retired. I don't really need the extra income, but it will help to pay my huge Federal tax bill, which is higher than all of my living expenses combined.

[ElDiabloJoe]

Ronald Reagan did two things that I heartily disagree with (with the benefit of hindsight, of course): 1) closed the mental hospitals, and; 2) enacted the WEP and GPO to social security.

Passage of this bill, the Social Security Fairness Act and signature by a president (both Biden and Trump have said they supported the Act) will return fairness to social security by eliminating the WEP and GPO.

Currently, if you earned 40 credits, AND you earned a public pension, they greatly reduced your social security - usually by 70%!! If your benefit was $700, you are getting $145/month simply because you paid into two different systems.

This Act does NOT give people with public pensions double-dipping access to social security UNLESS they also have earned their social security via 40 credits like everyone else.

This Act gives full credit that is due to anyone who worked their full 40 credits - as it should be.

Currently, someone with a government pension, even though they worked 10 years before and 10 years after in the private sector or otherwise worked enough to earn their 40 social security credits, has that social security benefit drastically reduced simply because they also worked in public service. Mostly it's cops, puddle-monkeys, and teachers.

Is it fair if you worked for IBM until you were 35 or 40, and then went and joined a police department for 20 years until you were 55 or 60 to only get what you earned from the police force, but get 70% of your social security benefit taken because you did that?

The other thing it does is protect mostly women. If your spouse worked for a city, county, state or the feds, your spousal benefit from their social security would be normally be negative or zero dollars. You did not get a thing even though the spouse earned their 40 credits.

This Act gives the rightfully earned fair benefit to those who earned it, regardless of whatever other career path they may have chosen over time.

[Bill14564]

It’s not quite that simple, right?

If you earned a pension at a job, quit for a while, then returned for enough time to qualify for a pension you wouldn’t put really expect to collect two pensions from the same company.

If you and your spouse both qualify for SS benefits you don’t expect to collect both your SS plus spouse or widow(er) benefits.

If you worked 80 quarters you don’t expect to get two SS checks.

The thought behind the WEP and GPO seems to be that the Govt pays two types of retirement, a pension for some and SS for others, and you cannot collect two retirements from the same source.

This new bill, which eliminates WEP and GPO, says yes you can collect two separate retirements from the Govt.

[Pugchief]

The better solution is to get rid of pensions for all govt employees (federal, state, municipal, county) and put them in a 401k type plan that the employer matches similarly to the private sector.

As far as SS is concerned, it prob makes sense to gradually move that away from the current ponzi structure toward a privatized system, while still honoring benefits to those who have paid in.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

It’s not quite that simple, right?

If you earned a pension at a job, quit for a while, then returned for enough time to qualify for a pension you wouldn’t put really expect to collect two pensions from the same company.

If you and your spouse both qualify for SS benefits you don’t expect to collect both your SS plus spouse or widow(er) benefits.

If you worked 80 quarters you don’t expect to get two SS checks.

The thought behind the WEP and GPO seems to be that the Govt pays two types of retirement, a pension for some and SS for others, and you cannot collect two retirements from the same source.

This new bill, which eliminates WEP and GPO, says yes you can collect two separate retirements from the Govt.

If a husband worked and qualifies for SS, the spouse can also collect a spouse benefit (half of the husband's check), even if she never worked. That would be two Government retirement checks. If the husband dies, the spouse can only collect one SS check, but it would be the higher amount.

I had a cousin who benefitted from 4 Government checks: a military retiree check, a spouse SS check, her husband's SS check, and her husband's civilian Government retirement check. And, she never worked a day in her life.

Note that military retirees are allowed to retire after 20 years, and then get a civilian Government job, and collect two Government retirement checks, and a SS check, and if they have a spouse, the spouse can collect a spouse benefit check, plus two survivor checks after he dies.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

If a husband worked and qualifies for SS, the spouse can also collect a spouse benefit (half of the husband's check), even if she never worked. That would be two Government retirement checks. If the husband dies, the spouse can only collect one SS check, but it would be the higher amount.

I had a cousin who benefitted from 4 Government checks: a military retiree check, a spouse SS check, her husband's SS check, and her husband's civilian Government retirement check. And, she never worked a day in her life.

Note that military retirees are allowed to retire after 20 years, and then get a civilian Government job, and collect two Government retirement checks, and a SS check, and if they have a spouse, the spouse can collect a spouse benefit check, plus two survivor checks after he dies.

Right, it's not simple.

I believe if a spouse has worked they can choose to collect their benefits or the spouse benefits, whichever is higher, but they don't get to collect both.

Did your cousin receive four checks with her name on them or were three of those made out to her husband?

The three checks might not be inconsistent. Military benefits could be handled completely and totally separate from SS benefits. The Federal govt has had two retirement plans recently. One of those plans did not require paying into SS while the current plan does. WEP and GPO applied to the earlier, non-SS plan only. With the new plan, the retiree will receive both a pension check and a SS check with survivor benefits applying to both.

[ElDiabloJoe]

[QUOTE=Bill14564;2395771]It’s not quite that simple, right?

If you earned a pension at a job, quit for a while, then returned for enough time to qualify for a pension you wouldn’t put really expect to collect two pensions from the same company. No, but if you earned a pension at one job (e.g., IBM), then worked for enough time to qualify for a pension from a completely different company (e.g., Delta Airlines), you'd be entitled to both earned pensions, right? I worked 10-plus years for Continental Airlines before becoming a street cop. Am I not entitled to the SS I paid into for those years at the airline AND the pension I earned in L.A.? Same with the military - you serve 20 years in the USMC, and then become a fireman at 40 and work another 25 years, did you not earn both the military and the city's pension?

If you and your spouse both qualify for SS benefits you don’t expect to collect both your SS plus spouse or widow(er) benefits. No, you qualify for EITHER your benefit, or the spousal benefit, not both.

If you worked 80 quarters you don’t expect to get two SS checks. Now you're just being silly. If I worked 40 quarters AND my wife worked 40 quarters, we should still get two social security checks, right? Or since it is one household you think we should only get the one?

The thought behind the WEP and GPO seems to be that the Govt pays two types of retirement, a pension for some and SS for others, and you cannot collect two retirements from the same source. IF your pension paid into SS (most don't), then YES, you paid into SS AND your city pension. You deserve both that you paid into.

This new bill, which eliminates WEP and GPO, says yes you can collect two separate retirements from the Govt.ONLY if you earned the government pension AND earned your 40 credits with non-public service employment../QUOTE]

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by ElDiabloJoe

1. But those affected by WEP are not collecting benefits from two separate providers, both the govt pension and the SS payments are from the govt. In fact, the govt pension was a program used instead of SS which is why the employee didn’t pay into SS under that program. The new law says to forget that, disregard that the pension was to replace SS, and write checks from the Fed Treasury for both programs.

2. Right, you don’t expect to collect twice from the same retirement source.

3. Two individuals, two qualifying careers, two checks. But that isn’t what I described and that isn’t what WEP or GPO applied to.

4. WEP and GPO saw that differently. They saw a single individual qualifying for govt benefits two ways but from the same govt and the same treasury. Both were intended to provide full retirement benefits to a single employee so it made no sense to pay double retirement benefits to that single employee.

5. Obviously. Otherwise, neither WEP nor GPO would apply.

NOTE: I’m not against the elimination of these two reductions, I just see the logic behind them.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Right, it's not simple.

I believe if a spouse has worked they can choose to collect their benefits or the spouse benefits, whichever is higher, but they don't get to collect both.

Did your cousin receive four checks with her name on them or were three of those made out to her husband?

The three checks might not be inconsistent. Military benefits could be handled completely and totally separate from SS benefits. The Federal govt has had two retirement plans recently. One of those plans did not require paying into SS while the current plan does. WEP and GPO applied to the earlier, non-SS plan only. With the new plan, the retiree will receive both a pension check and a SS check with survivor benefits applying to both.

When my cousin's husband died, she was eligible for 3 checks in her name, a SS check, a military survivor check, and a civilian Government pension survivor check. While he was alive, there were 4 checks, but only one was in her name, the SS spouse check.

But, the most absurd situation is that military people can retire after 20 years, and then immediately return as a GS-15 or SES civilian employee and earn another full pension. They have an inside track with military preference, and sometimes they return in one day to the same desk.

[ElDiabloJoe]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

1. But those affected by WEP are not collecting benefits from two separate providers, both the govt pension and the SS payments are from the govt. In fact, the govt pension was a program used instead of SS which is why the employee didn’t pay into SS under that program. The new law says to forget that, disregard that the pension was to replace SS, and write checks from the Fed Treasury for both programs.

2. Right, you don’t expect to collect twice from the same retirement source.

3. Two individuals, two qualifying careers, two checks. But that isn’t what I described and that isn’t what WEP or GPO applied to.

4. WEP and GPO saw that differently. They saw a single individual qualifying for govt benefits two ways but from the same govt and the same treasury. Both were intended to provide full retirement benefits to a single employee so it made no sense to pay double retirement benefits to that single employee.

5. Obviously. Otherwise, neither WEP nor GPO would apply.

Bill, I might be wrong, but it sounds like you are assuming that a double-dipper earned both a Federal pension and Federal social security benefits. MOST of those impacted by this were teachers at the local level, and city police and fireman MOST of whom receive pensions from their county or state, not the Federal government.

The Federal government is not paying people twice in most cases. They are paying people for benefits (40 credits) earned in private employment, and local/state pensions they paid into are paying their pensions.

Social Security was supposed to be part of a proverbial three-legged stool for retirement: Employer pension, social security, and savings. Sadly, many only have the one leg of that stool to rely upon. The newer approach to 401(k)/IRA/SEP/Keough etc, became popular since so many employer pensions were raided and depleted (auto manufactures and airlines are classic examples). Now many only pay into 401(k) as their savings, so they foolishly combine those two stool legs.

Anyhow, this Social Security Fairness Act is not about giving people both pensions and social security if they did not pay into both. They "Fairness" comes from getting the full benefit for your years of paying into social security and not having your benefit reduced 70% or down to zero simply because you worked for the City of New York instead of Microsoft. It's like reducing your social security 70% because Microsoft granted you stock options throughout your career there - why should you get both stock options AND social security, right?

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by ElDiabloJoe

Bill, I might be wrong, but it sounds like you are assuming that a double-dipper earned both a Federal pension and Federal social security benefits. MOST of those impacted by this were teachers at the local level, and city police and fireman MOST of whom receive pensions from their county or state, not the Federal government.

The Federal government is not paying people twice in most cases. They are paying people for benefits (40 credits) earned in private employment, and local/state pensions they paid into are paying their pensions.

Social Security was supposed to be part of a proverbial three-legged stool for retirement: Employer pension, social security, and savings. Sadly, many only have the one leg of that stool to rely upon. The newer approach to 401(k)/IRA/SEP/Keough etc, became popular since so many employer pensions were raided and depleted (auto manufactures and airlines are classic examples). Now many only pay into 401(k) as their savings, so they foolishly combine those two stool legs.

Anyhow, this Social Security Fairness Act is not about giving people both pensions and social security if they did not pay into both. They "Fairness" comes from getting the full benefit for your years of paying into social security and not having your benefit reduced 70% or down to zero simply because you worked for the City of New York instead of Microsoft. It's like reducing your social security 70% because Microsoft granted you stock options throughout your career there - why should you get both stock options AND social security, right?

If the public pension was funded in lieu of paying SS tax then it is reasonable that the reductions would apply.

SS was never intended to be part of a three-legged stool. 401Ks did not exist when SS was created. Public pension programs funded with money that would otherwise have gone to SS never envisioned the recipient receiving SS. The govt’s CSRS was an example of this - no SS payments and no 401K, just a generous pension adequate to retire on.

The govt’s FERS is an example of the three-legged stool program.

[retiredguy123]

Personally, I think the spouse benefit should be eliminated. If someone doesn't pay into the system, they should not get a check. The way the current system works is that a worker can be married 4 or 5 times, and as long as each marriage lasts at least 10 years, all of the ex-spouses are entitled to a check, even if they never worked at all. Some ex-spouses, who never worked, are receiving a check that is higher than a fulltime worker who worked for 30 or 40 years.

[bsloan1960]

People with pensions were being screwed out of some or all of the SS because the government felt they made too much money with their pensions. So if your were making $500 per month on a pension, your SS would be reduced by $500. This is a real screw job since people work their entire careers to get a pension AND SS knowing in advance they couldn't live only SS.

Originally Posted by CoachKandSportsguy

Senate passes Social Security bill to repeal WEP and GPO

Not sure what this means, other than more people can collect, and that means the insolvency is now approaching sooner.

Lets hope the Congress can fix social security without all the continuing resolutions to fix the debt ceiling and the budget ever increasing spending

good luck to us!

[bagboy]

I can't speak to spousal benefits affected by this passage. I can tell you, my wife worked for the state of Ohio for thirty years, retiring at age 48. She began collecting retirement right away from Ohio Public Employee Retirement System. She then went to work for a private company outside of government for 11 years, paying into Social Security for 44 quarters.
She applied for Social Security at age 65, and her benefits were drastically reduced due to her state pension. The passage of the Social Security Fairness Act will allow her to collect what she has earned, based on the amount she has paid into it.