Supporting solutions to the WEP issue
OPERS works to ensure Social Security benefits are fairly calculated
By Christopher Collins, Ohio Public Employees Retirement System
April 4, 2017 — We often receive feedback from our members regarding the extent to which their Social Security benefits are impacted by the Windfall Elimination Provision. In fact, it’s one of the most-frequent issues we hear about from our retirees.
There seems to be a misunderstanding regarding how WEP and a companion provision affecting spouses, called the Government Pension Offset, work, or how they can be modified. First, let’s define what they are.
What are WEP and GPO?
Under WEP, a Social Security retirement or disability benefit might be reduced if a recipient receives a public pension from a job where he or she did not pay into Social Security.
Most public employees in Ohio are not covered by Social Security for their retirement benefit. Instead, they belong to one of five statewide public retirement systems that pay their pension upon retirement. However, if they worked for a period of time in the private sector, they also may be entitled to a Social Security benefit when they retire.
If that’s the case, they are subject to WEP, a provision of federal law that potentially reduces the amount they may collect in Social Security benefits. GPO affects their spouses in the same way.
In some cases, the reduction can be as much as one-half the amount of the person’s pension benefit. GPO has a different calculation, but the end result is a significant reduction of a Social Security benefit based on a spouse’s work record.
WEP and GPO are federal laws
WEP and GPO are part of the Social Security Act, which is a federal law. We cannot control whether and when they are repealed. WEP and GPO were originally adopted to address legitimate concerns regarding the way Social Security benefits are calculated. The Social Security formula provides a level of benefits based on how much you earn. The formula was designed to provide higher replacement rates for lower-income workers.
Normally this is not a problem. However, for certain individuals who are eligible to receive Social Security benefits and who also receive a pension from non-Social Security-covered employment, such as OPERS, the formula often produces results that are out of step with individuals’ total career earnings.
Each year an individual works in non-Social Security-covered employment appears as a zero in the benefit formula. Adding zeroes to the formula’s average calculation tends to lower the average, making it seem like the individual had lower total earnings than he or she actually did, and creating a higher replacement rate than was warranted. Congress enacted WEP to address this inequity.
Of course, we know now the formula does not always function as intended, and that WEP (and the GPO) need to be revisited, but it has been difficult to build consensus around a workable solution.
OPERS advocates for change
Virtually each Congressional session, legislation is introduced to repeal WEP and/or GPO. However these bills have never progressed through the legislative process despite having hundreds of co-sponsors. Why? The simple answer is cost.
The Social Security Administration has estimated that a full repeal of WEP and GPO would cost tens of billions of dollars over a 10-year period. The current political climate in Washington makes it highly improbable to pass any repeal legislation that would cost the Social Security trust fund that much money without some way to offset the cost.
That said, OPERS is in continual communication with the members of the Ohio congressional delegation, advocating in favor of legislation and policies that improve our members’ retirement security, including WEP/GPO relief.
The downside of a repeal effort
OPERS advocates for a more equitable calculation of WEP and GPO, if not a full repeal; however, we do not want the solution to result in legislation that would require all public employees to participate in Social Security.
Mandatory Social Security coverage for public employees in non-covered states would be devastating to the public retirement systems in those states if contributions previously made to the funds were instead diverted to Social Security.
A more likely alternative to (and perhaps a first step toward) total repeal is reform of the WEP and/or GPO formula to make them more equitable.
The latest attempt: The Brady bill, HR 711
Congressman Kevin Brady (R-Texas), chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Ways and Means, has been working on legislation to modify the WEP formula over the last several years. The latest version of this legislation, the Equal Treatment of Public Servants Act, HR 711, would have reduced the existing WEP for individuals who were 62 or older before 2017, and replaced WEP with an entirely new formula for individuals who turned 62 on or after 2017.
After making significant progress, HR 711 stalled in committee in July. From its inception, HR 711 had critics. There were a number of reasons why, including opposition from groups who would not support anything other than full repeal of WEP (and GPO).
For our part, we viewed HR 711 as the closest we had come to true WEP reform in the 30-plus years since the provision was enacted. We sought to keep the discussion going in spite of the many concerns that were raised, hoping that some compromise could be reached. Through each step of the process, we worked with Congressman Brady and committee staff to make them aware of the real-life consequences of the WEP and to ensure that our members’ needs and concerns were heard.
While there were attempts to address as many of the critics’ concerns as possible, it became clear that a consensus could not be reached, and subsequently, the bill was pulled from consideration pending further discussions. HR 711 died when the previous Congress ended Jan. 3.
What’s next
We fully expect that a new version of HR 711 will be reintroduced in the current Congress. The coalition that supported the bill has continued to engage with Congressman Brady, encouraging him to move forward with WEP reform. As we have since HR 711 was first introduced, OPERS intends to closely review any legislative proposal to determine its impact on our members.
You will have a chance to participate in this process as it will likely be necessary for OPERS to seek additional data from our members about their Social Security status to help inform our analysis of any forthcoming WEP reform proposal.
Once OPERS has had a chance to review the details, we will communicate with our members about how they can help advocate for a WEP reform solution that helps improve the current situation.
Stay tuned for more information.
Thank you for explaining the ramifications of a total repeal of WEP, as I wasn’t aware of the far reaching effects it would have. I do appreciate your continued efforts in negotiating for HR711.
Because I chose to work 2 or 3 jobs including a OPERS job, I should not be punished for being a hard worker. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. I paid the dues and SS should pay them back.
I agree 100%. Why does the government have any say-so with regard to our pensions?
I agree. There should not be any punishment.
I work in the private sector and decided to apply for two jobs working for the state of Ohio. When my disinter told me to look further into this as it could affect my retirement I simply could not accept that what she was telling me was correct.
It did seem possible that it could be legal. Giving up 2/3if the Social Security I am entity’s from my husband’s employment just to work for a few years for the government. Why they wish to penalize exper or people who have so much to give. Well it is possible. In Ohio and only six other states. Here we are again Ohio…stuck and unwilling to move forward.
Brilliant.
Dee,
There are workers and spouses in every state who are subject to the Windfall Elimination Provision and the Government Pension Offset. To characterize it as indicative of any shortcoming by the state of Ohio is imprudent.
We’ve both been retired under Opers ans social security and still working paying into social security. Not fair that we are penalized with WEP and the offset. UNFAIR!
It’s 2023 and we are still penalized for working within the private and public sectors. One could easily see a form of government extortion buy not awarding us the entitlement we paid into. What is the status on correcting this fraudulent scam?
Tim,
WEP relief was not included in the recently signed federal omnibus bill. The relief effort will have to begin anew with the next session of Congress.
Thank you for the update. Please keep OPERS members informed of potential legislation regarding WEP. I worked 23 years in the private sector and currently 18 years in the public sector. As a divorced woman, I will rely solely on my retirement benefits. I am looking at a 40% reduction in Social Security benefits. It is unfair to be penalized because I joined the public sector. The public health workforce is shrinking. This is an example of why working for the public sector is not favorable.
I agree. I worked 26 years under Social Security and 13 years under OPERS because that’s where the jobs were. I shouldn’t be penalized because I chose to work for a public entity. Frustrating.
Do you know what happens to the $ we don’t get. I should be getting over $900 and I get $307
The funds remain with the Social Security Administration.
Same thing happened with my husband and myself. We worked as teenagers then taught school in Monroe County, Michigan for many years. Then got jobs in Lucas County, Ohio, just across state line. Didn’t realize our social security benefits would be affected until we retired!
I worked for 21 years in the private sector paid into Social Security then went to work for ODOT retired in 2016 with 24 years and 9 months service due to attrition. So I have a reduced OPERS pension and a reduced SSI pension I feel that I paid into SSI I would like to get my amount out of it that I paid into it not the less than one third of my OPERS pension monthly . I hope to see some reform in this legislation we are one of eleven states that are left in GPO and WEP . Everything I read I keeps referring back to our State Legislature won’t budge on this . Thanks for having this site to refer to .
I agree. I also worked my whole life, 23 years under social security and the last 29 under OPERS. I started collecting my social security when I was able to and now they want to penalize me because I retired and collecting my pension under OPERS. How ridiculous is that! I paid that money into social security and I should be able to collect it. It’s my money, not theirs. I believe Ohio is one of only a couple the penalize under this windfall elimination.
Thank you so much!! I hope something like HR 711 is passed soon!
Thank you for addressing this issue, it been a problem area for members of the FOP as well.
Chris:
I understand the programs but in conversations with friends from the state of NY I find they are not being penalized on their state pensions like Ohio. They draw both in full. Just curious how Ohio was among a handful of states that decided not to pay into SS? Thanks.
Some retirement systems, like OPERS, actually pre-date Social Security.
Under the original Social Security Act of 1935, state and local government employees were excluded from Social Security coverage because of uncertainty whether the federal government could impose taxes on state and local governments and their employees.
Beginning in 1951, states were allowed to enter into voluntary agreements with the federal government to provide Social Security coverage to public employees. These arrangements are called “Section 218 Agreements.” All 50 states, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other interstate instrumentalities have Section 218 Agreements with SSA.
In 26 states, at least 90% of state and local government employees work in positions covered by Social Security, meaning they make contributions to both their retirement system and Social Security. By contrast, in a number of states like California, Colorado, Louisiana, Nevada, Ohio, and Texas, to name a few, less than half of state and local government employees are covered. Approximately one-fourth of the nation’s public employees are not covered by Social Security. For those employees, their public retirement system is intended to be their main source of income in retirement.
As mentioned in the blog, mandatory Social Security coverage for public employees in non-covered states would be devastating to the public retirement systems in those states if contributions previously made to the funds were instead diverted to Social Security.
What about those of us who haven’t had the number of years to accumulate OPERS funds but worked 20+ years contributing to Social Security? Why are we being penalized?
Donna,
The Government Pension Offset and Windfall Elimination Provision are policies administered by the Social Security Administration, not OPERS. If you have questions about GPO or WEP, contact your local Social Security office or access its website at ssa.gov.
Julie, OPERS
If this program is federally controlled how is ohio able to be one of a few states that have this provision?
Valerie,
The Windfall Elimination Provision applies to some workers in every state, such as first responders. It just applies to more people in Ohio because Ohio is a “non-Social Security state,” meaning most public workers don’t pay into, nor receive benefits from, Social Security for the time they work in the public sector. So it’s not correct to say that “Ohio is one of a few states that have this provision.”
I have contributed to Social Security (currently receiving for employment with Social Security contribution employment); OPERS (not yet applied for and not vested); and FERS (not yet applied for and vested). I am unsure how my 3 retirement incomes are effected by WEP, I am 64 years old and have no idea how to obtain the information necessary to decide how to proceed. Any advise would be greatly appreciated.
Helen,
Thank you for your post. There are several moving parts to your question, so your best bet would be to contact your local Social Security office.
Good luck,
Julie, Ohio PERS
It is my understanding in you have 35 or more years in social security and then went to PERS your social security will not be affected. Is this true?
Yes. Under current law your Social Security benefit will not be reduced due to your OPERS pension if you have 30 or more years of “substantial” earnings in a job where you paid Social Security taxes. The threshold for “substantial” earnings changes each year. Social Security has a chart on its website that shows the threshold each year from 1937 to today. (https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10045.pdf#page=2) The original version of HR 711 included extending that requirement to 35 years, but that issue will need to be revisited when the new version of the WEP reform bill is reintroduced.
If you have more questions about your Social Security payments, you should contact your local Social Security office. In the meantime, we’ll continue following the WEP/GPO issue and provide an update when any new developments occur.
I am currently still working part time in the private sector. I do not want more then I deserve but I feel I should get benefits from SS on what I have actually paid in and continue to pay in. Your explanation of why it was enacted and why full repeal would be bad is that best I have read. Thank you for clarifying I had been in favor of full repeal.
Thank you for this information. Keep fighting to get WEP changed or repealed. I understand that a person who worked 30 years under Social Security gets their full benefit while someone like me who worked 26 years has their benefit reduced. This seems so unfair to me. We shouldn’t be penalized, because the economy forced us out of the private workforce and we were lucky enough to find work in the public sector where I worked for 13 years. Keep fighting for this change.
Thank you for the update. I have 23 years in SS and now for local government. I support the change and sincerely hope that HR 711 passes soon as I only have one more year until possible retirement.
Thank you for your advocacy and keeping us informed. It is a significant issue, having worked in both private non-profit and the public sectors, and now find that my income is far less in retirement than if I had stayed on one sector. The pace of progress has been so slow, I hope it can be remedied in my lifetime.
While I can understand some I don’t see how my money is not my money. If I had a private company pension I would still have my ssI . We already get penalized by not having access to ssi disability after our disability was changed. We get hurt or sick and can’t work but we have very limit disability benefits and still have to pay into Medicare which is fine as we will be able use it. If someone has never worked or is from somewhere else they get the full boat,I don’t understand
Thank you for continuing to inform us regarding this important issue. I am receiving
SS benefits with a 40% penalty. I feel strongly
That the WEP should be repealed. I was fortunate to obtain a position in the Public Sector and worked for 20 years. I found out after working a number of years about the WEP and find it totally unfair.
Thank you for the information On WEP and hoping we can get this changed. My husband passed away in 2005 and I cannot get any of his Social Security because I receive Opers. This is unfair as he paid in to Social Security all those years and he passed before he could get it and I his spouse can’t get it either. Where does his share go? To people on drugs??? Sad.
I think we all need to really inspect any bill that is forthcoming. The last version was noted as ‘cost neutral’ which is obviously not a total, or even partial, elimination of the WEP. From what I understood the older retirees might get a few dollars a month more initially while future retirees would actually see a reduction depending on their yearly pension income. Meanwhile the government keeps tapping SS funds for other programs that have nothing to do with retired people who actually paid into the funds and deserve the supplement.
Thanks for the thorough explanation. I appreciate your advocacy on this.
OPERS retirees should not be penalized in regard to either of the above mentioned federal laws. We are penalized for working. Spouses that have never worked a day in their entire life receive half of their spouses social security and the full amount upon the death of the spouse. If they do not pay into the social security system, spouses should not receive benefits…especially since OPERS members ARE working and receive reduced social security benefits and in many cases no social security at all. If the federal government has plenty of money to pay social security benefits to spouses that never worked (I’d call this welfare) then certainly money should be made available to spouses that did work.
Well said! I totally agree! The WEP should be totally repealed. I am concerned, however, that older retirees like myself may not benefit if this happens.
sorry I think it is all unexceptable i worked for the state and did what they tell you to do now put away moneys for retirement i had more points than required for my ss because i worked two other jobs under ss and one part time self busness which i payed ss but when i retired i can only draw 40 % of what i would be entitled to if i had not worked for the state .
I feel that those that worked for ss and a private self paid retirement if they are entitled to both then they should get the total that they are entitled to instead of paying all that in and having everyone else that didn’t get it instead
I agree that Wep should be repealed. I retired from military after 22 years and fully paid up SS. I went on to public employment and retired from it also. There was quite a few years when that amount they took out for SS would of went a long way toward taking care of my family. I surely thought I would get the full amount I was entitled to. I think we could do well to write our representatives.
You are absolutely correct. It is a shame that I am being punished because I chose to work 2, 3 or 4 jobs under Social Security and pay the going rates at the time along with working for an OPERS Gov. Job. In no way did my Social Security payments affect OPERS in any way shape or form. I planned out my retirement only to have it STOLEN!!!
Good luck with that, and the politicians listen shake their heads and pad us on the back and say will do what we can and that’s the end of it. I’ve been fighting this for years and have lost every bit of ss.
I agree that I have been fighting for repeal for 15 years with very tiny support from Congress. Nothing less than full repeal of the GPO AND WEP IS ACCEPTABLE. Quit ripping off the citizens who play along with the rules by having ss taxes deducted from their checks for decades only to find out it will be reduced by at least two thirds of the amount of your pension if you dare to retire and start collecting your public employer pension. So I guess my strategy now is to work until I drop dead of old age if possible. My husband is passed way before his full retirement age, so he or I won’t get any of his either. Sad and pathetic. Congress wake up and do something. Full repeal of WEP and GPO!!!!
If you retire and begin taking OPERS benefits, can you just let the SS benefit “ride” – that is, not attempt to take SS for a few more years. Is that possible? Or legal? If you don’t need it right away, let the SS sit?
MMS,
For questions about your Social Security benefit, we suggest contacting Social Security (800-772-1213) or perhaps a financial adviser.
I agree that we ALL should get the full amount WE paid in to SS. Don’t tell me that if we got what we put in that the SS would go bankrupt. It’s our money. We should get what we put in.
The present law is an extreme penalty to married retirees. Both my wife and I were public employees contributing to the Ohio Systems as well as into Social Security before that. My SS retirement benefit was reduced significantly when I retired at age 70. My wife’s SS benefits were also reduced as a percentage of my previously reduced SS benefit rather than being based on her own earnings. So she was allocated less than 40 percent of whatever her SS retirement earnings might have been as a single SS beneficiary. AND the Social Security Administrative Office noted that was all she could receive under the current law. That is a travestry in my view.
My husband worked 26 years under social security and retired in OPERS. Now when he collects social security it will be at 50% and his Medicare part B premium has gone up every year since he hasn’t collected social security so it is a double penalty. Higher premium and lower social security. It does not make sense. He would collect more at 100% social security and zero OPERS.
I had to retire at 62 with Opers of less than 7 yrs. service, but also had enough points in jobs paying into SS., so l draw from both. Now with WEP, my SS benefit goes down every year that l get COLA adjustment on Pers. So l am kept at the same amount since retiring 13 yrs ago….that’s the same benefit of the two benefits combined. It is very low…well under $700. a mo. I am in favor of the WEP law at least being adjusted. Thanks for my Pers benefit.
I’m still a bit confused. Majority of my working life has been a public employee. If my husband receives a small military pension at age 60 and retires at 62 from his factory work and starts receiving social security, then his social security will be reduced? And my spousal social security benefit will be essentially eliminated factoring in my OPERS pension at age 65? Social security office wasn’t even able to answer this and just handed us the pamphlets on WEP and GPO. Hopefully this becomes clearer in the next 4 or 5 years.
Rose,
Thank you for your comment. If you have questions about your Social Security payments, you should contact your local Social Security office. Like you, we are carefully following the WEP/GPO issue and we will provide an update when any new developments occur.
Thanks again,
Julie, Ohio PERS
I am not necessarily opposed to changes in how the WEP is applied, provided that the changes are phased in slowly and do not negatively affect millions of people who are close to retirement. But HR 711 was horrible legislation. According to Steven Goss, Chief Actuary of Social Security, it would have reduced SS benefits for 11 million people, while increasing benefits for about 1 million – so there would have been many more losers than winners had it passed. The main problem is that the bill would have eliminated the WEP exemption for people who have paid significant amounts into SS for 30 years and for those who are not eligible for pensions from non-covered employment. The original bill also would have subjected 7 million current beneficiaries to extremely intrusive WEP audits, and any of these folks who could not or would not comply with the required certifications from jobs they had decades ago that they were not eligible for pensions (yes, that includes people in their 80s and 90s) would have been hit with thousands of dollars in retroactive penalties that would have been taken out of their future benefit checks. The author of this article, as well as other cheerleaders for this bill that was little more than a thinly-veiled attempt by the Republicans to cut aggregate SS benefits for retirees and near-retirees, should be ashamed of themselves for not looking beneath the surface and naively assuming that any “reform” of the WEP must be a good thing. Thank God for honest professionals like Steven Goss who are willing to examine a bill’s actual language, and not just its title.
OPERS’ goal in supporting legislation to repeal or reform WEP is to find a solution that is beneficial for the majority of OPERS members and retirees.
HR 711 was not a perfect bill as introduced, and it was still being amended based on feedback received by stakeholders and experts, including Mr. Goss, at the time it was pulled from consideration. We were very involved in tracking the proposed changes and conducting analyses of how the changes to the bill altered its impact.
OPERS’ ultimate position on a WEP reform bill would be based on how the final bill’s provisions would benefit or harm OPERS members. In the current fiscal environment in Congress, any WEP reform legislation will include consideration of both the cost to Social Security and ways to offset that cost.
Early versions of HR 711 included enforcement provisions designed to catch individuals who have not been following the law, and therefore, had received Social Security benefits greater than what current law allowed. Those enforcement provisions supported some of the cost to fix the formula for individuals currently impacted by WEP. Without those enforcement mechanisms, the amount the WEP formula could be changed was reduced.
We look forward to working with Congressman Brady and other members of Congress when they revisit this issue to find a solution that works for the most people.
If this is a federal law then why do only seven states participate? This is criminal. If you contributed to two savings accounts, what would happen if you were told, “Sorry, you only get one back.”
Some retirement systems, like OPERS, actually pre-date Social Security.
Under the original Social Security Act of 1935, state and local government employees were excluded from Social Security coverage because of uncertainty whether the federal government could impose taxes on state and local governments and their employees.
Beginning in 1951, states were allowed to enter into voluntary agreements with the federal government to provide Social Security coverage to public employees. These arrangements are called “Section 218 Agreements.” All 50 states, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other interstate instrumentalities have Section 218 Agreements with SSA.
In 26 states, at least 90% of state and local government employees work in positions covered by Social Security, meaning they make contributions to both their retirement system and Social Security. By contrast, in a number of states like California, Colorado, Louisiana, Nevada, Ohio, and Texas, to name a few, less than half of state and local government employees are covered. Approximately one-fourth of the nation’s public employees are not covered by Social Security. For those employees, their public retirement system is intended to be their main source of income in retirement.
As mentioned in the blog, mandatory Social Security coverage for public employees in non-covered states would be devastating to the public retirement systems in those states if contributions previously made to the funds were instead diverted to Social Security.
All OPERS retirees that have worked for years before and during their career in the public sector should get every penny of their social security. The Windfall Elimination Tax should not apply to those employees. The government seems to have plenty of money to hand out money to people, citizens and non-citizens, who have done nothing to earn it. NOT FAIR!
Add my support to the list of those wishing reform to current WEP regulations. I qualify for Social Security benefits based on my work experience. I also am eligible for spousal benefits. My ss amount is reduced by approximately 33% and I receive nothing from my spouse’s benefits. All because I worked and receive a pension from OPERS. This monthly benefit (OPERS) is also lower because I worked part-time for several years. That additional 33% would certainly help each month.
This is so frustrating and a real hardship for many. Ohio is one of the states with a large population that this offset applies too. Why are some states effected but not all states? I really hope this gets repealed soon.
Thanks for your question, SB.
Some retirement systems, like OPERS, actually pre-date Social Security.
Under the original Social Security Act of 1935, state and local government employees were excluded from Social Security coverage because of uncertainty whether the federal government could impose taxes on state and local governments and their employees.
Beginning in 1951, states were allowed to enter into voluntary agreements with the federal government to provide Social Security coverage to public employees. These arrangements are called “Section 218 Agreements.” All 50 states, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and other interstate instrumentalities have Section 218 Agreements with SSA.
In 26 states, at least 90% of state and local government employees work in positions covered by Social Security, meaning they make contributions to both their retirement system and Social Security. By contrast, in a number of states like California, Colorado, Louisiana, Nevada, Ohio, and Texas, to name a few, less than half of state and local government employees are covered. Approximately one-fourth of the nation’s public employees are not covered by Social Security. For those employees, their public retirement system is intended to be their main source of income in retirement.
Julie, Ohio PERS
l am in agreement with nearly all of the previous comments shown above. It’s obvious that the Federal Government is using extortion against OPERS retirees that have worked honest jobs in their careers in both Social Security and public service. Instead of the Feds holding OPERS funds as “ransom” in (exchange) order to release the full amount of Social Security owed to us (rightfully ours!), they should replace the funds they removed over time from Soc. Sec. to disburse in other areas under the Federal umbrella. OPERS, thanks for advocating for thousands of us affected by WEP and GPO, both ridiculous and economically harmful laws!
THE WEP IS AN UNFAIR LAW THAT HURTS SENIORS LIKE MY SELF AND SPOUSE LIVING ON A FIXED
INCOME , I WORKED FOR THE DOD FED GOVT AND MY SPOUSE FOR THE STATE OF CASLIF,
IT IS DIFFICULT TO MAKE ENDS MEET EVERY MONTH, WE NEED RELIEF NOW, PLEASE REPEAL THIS LAW
ITS SIMPLY UNJUST, I AM PLEADING TO CONGRESS TO TAKE ACTION TO HELP US, DO WHAT IS RIGHT
SHOW THAT YOU CARE AND RESPECT THE PEOPLE THAT WORKED FOR OUR GOVT AND STATE GOVT,
WE HAVE WAITED LONG ENOUGH DO NOT CONTINUE TO HARM US WITH THIS LAW, ITS TIME NOW
FOR YOU OUR REPS TO REPEAL THE WEO/GPO
I do not want anything more that I am entitled to, just what I earned while I was working outside the public sector and paid into social security.
I agree 100% or give me my money back.The Government needs
to pay back the IOU’S to social security.
I have taken a complete different view of the WEP than most others have taken. It is my belief, and supported by some attorneys, that WEP is unconstitutional.
As an example, I had more than enough credits to qualify for Social Security. Each year I received a document from Social Security that indicated what my benefit would be if I retired at age 62, which I did. When applying for SS I was told that my benefit would be reduced by about x amount. I thought, however, that a person with the exact number of years and approximately the same amount covered SS income as me with no public pension the benefit should be the same. The money that I and my employers paid into the system was not government money, it was mine and my employers to purchase a benefit upon my retirement. But, because I chose to serve in a public service career I and others like me are being punished rather than rewarded for that service.
Why do I think WEP is unconstitutional? It violates the “Equal Protection of the Law” language guaranteed by the Constitution. Equal SS years and similar income earned that goes into the SS calculation should be equal. I and my employers paid for it and it is not up to Congress to ignore the Constitution and take away from me the level of benefit we paid for. I realize that when this was passed Congress was controlled by Democrats and it was just another way to buy votes from lower income people. One attorney I spoke to told me that if this was ever taken to court and reviewed by the court strictly by what the Constitutional provisions are, it would almost be a slam dunk to win the case.
One suggestion to cover the added costs if WEP is repealed is to increase the amount of income that is subject to SS taxes. The current system is supported by mid-level and lower income workers. This group, for the most part pays on 100% of their earnings while upper income people get to stop paying after the current level of income is reached. Making this change would cover the WEP repeal and provide more than enough funds to support SS well into more than the foreseeable future. If Congress is concerned for the people who are supporting SS now they should make this change. One thing to remember is that that “baby boomers” are passing through the system now. With a lower number of people in generations coming afterwards the costs should start to decline over a period of time.
One last thing. Social Security should be taken off budget as it was originally conceived. The Social Security Administration should become a quasi-government entity to make it’s revenues off limits to Congress and the President. This is the way it started out when it was adopted in the FDR administration. President Johnson, with the help of Congress, put it on budget in order to be able to pay for the Vietnam War and for his failed Great Society programs. Let’s put a stop to paying for “bridges to “nowhere” and keep these monies for the people who paid into the system and expect a level of benefit if they qualify no matter where they may have worked at any point in their life.
I am late to the party, but right on! I agree with you 100%.
I believe part of the law was passed during Reagan administration and the other was during Carter administration, so it seems to be a bipartison highway robbery of hard working, tax paying citizens.
This would be such a blessing to so many people like myself that worked a majority of our career in the private sector and do not have enough years in the public sector to draw a decent pension and could really use the SS to supplement our income when we are aging rapidly. I will soon be 66 years old and and would love to think about retirement but I’m fearful that because of the WEP that it will never be in reach. It’s hard to remain positive when the numbers just don’t add up so you have to keep working. I hope Congress will be fair and help people like myself to be able to relax and enjoy retirement like so many others are able to do! I worked 2 jobs for 15 years and paid in to SS while I was employed in the public sector all the while knowing I was going to get a large reduction in my SS due to WEP. There has to be a fair solution for all. Thanks OPERS for keeping on this for us.
It would be worthwhile for anyone in this position to make an appointment and visit the local Social Security office, along with the PERS offices, to get some idea of your actual retirement allotments. The SS people really are accommodating and open to giving you accurate estimates of your benefits. With a smaller PERS benefit your SS benefits would be greater, maybe with only a 30% (?) cut. I made the rounds when that Senate bill 5 was being proposed and I was pretty surprised at how helpful these agencies were. When you go in and sit down they already have all the numbers you need to guide your decision. (I’m still working)
I too work in the private sector for 35 years now my full-time job is with OPERS still working part time in the private sector I am very worried how this will affect me.
how many people could it effect ? thay started to take ss from people working under pers in the early 1980sits a shame when people get more money on public assistent than I make on ss after working almost 50 years
I went and checked with SS a couple of times and am still confused. GPO is for the dependents and WPE is for the PER’s employee. The paper stated that GPO could or would cut a percentage of the dependents SS,The WPE parts says it will only take up to 434 dollars max from the PERS employee. is this correct.
Thanks
You may be eligible to receive Social Security benefits either based on your own private sector work record, and/or you may be eligible to receive benefits based on a spouse’s private sector work record.
Social Security benefits paid to spouses, widows, and widowers are “dependent” benefits. Set up in the 1930s, these benefits were to compensate spouses who stayed home to raise a family and were financially dependent on the working spouse. It’s now common for both spouses to work, each earning their own Social Security retirement benefit. The law requires a person’s spouse, widow, or widower benefit to be offset by the dollar amount of their own Social Security benefit.
The GPO can affect you if you are receiving an OPERS pension or disability benefit and you are eligible to receive a Social Security dependent’s benefit based on a spouse’s private sector work record as described above.
The WEP can affect you when you receive an OPERS pension or disability benefit and you qualify for Social Security retirement or disability benefits from work in other jobs for which you did pay Social Security taxes.
The way the WEP and GPO reductions are applied to your Social Security benefit differ. You should contact your local Social Security office for specific information on how the WEP and GPO might affect your Social Security benefit in your specific circumstance. Your OPERS pension is not impacted by these laws.
Hopefully that clarifies the difference between these two federal laws.
If my husband worked 23 pers and 23 ss will he be cut 50 percent ss or is the max 450 for 2020?
Wendy,
The Government Pension Offset and Windfall Elimination Provision are policies administered by the Social Security Administration, not OPERS. If you have questions about GPO or WEP, we recommend contacting your local Social Security office or access their website at ssa.gov.
Julie, OPERS
Have there been any updates or changes in the last few months?
Ms. Thurber,
We continue to be hopeful that Congressman Brady will introduce HR 711. It remains an important issue when we make Congressional office visits in Washington.
Julie, OPERS
how can we know how Soc.Sec. is calculated? i wrote to them about this last June and have yet to get a response.
Genevieve,
If you have questions about how your Social Security benefit is calculated, you should contact your local Social Security office.
Julie, OPERS
You can also create an account at ssa.gov and it will figure your benefits for you. It even has a WEP page so you know how hard that will hit you.
Thx for posting my concerns about soc.sec…many it will encourage others to speak up…there is strength in numbers!!
I teach in Missouri. I’m affected by both WEP and GPO. I feel the Government Pension Offset to be very harmful to widowed women….especially if they have been a mother and caregiver….and possibly the “breadwinner” for the family. What do you know about the elimination of GPO…if you work your last 60 months, paying into SS and your Retirement System? How does it work? What paperwork needs to be completed? Thank you in advance for your knowledge and response! PB
Ms. Brauer,
Thank you for your question. We continue to advocate for the repeal or reform of GPO and WEP in Congress. For answers to your specific situation, please contact your local Social Security office for assistance.
Julie, OPERS
i would like to think that since OPERS took away our 3 percent raises that they should push to get our full social security benefits. that 3 percent that ISN”T compounded. Good Luck Ms. Brauer.
I am very interested in why Opers has made deals with the government to take back our ssa income. This is totally unfair for the working class people. Thanks Mattie
Mattie,
The Government Pension Offset and Windfall Elimination Provision, commonly known as GPO and WEP, are federal laws enacted in 1977 and 1983 respectively. They are not OPERS policies. We are in continual communication with the members of the Ohio congressional delegation, advocating in favor of legislation and policies that improve our members’ retirement security, including GPO/WEP relief. OPERS advocates for a more equitable calculation of GPO and WEP, if not a full repeal; however, we do not want the solution to result in legislation that would require all public employees to participate in Social Security.
Julie, OPERS
Hello, thank you for this blog post. It is my understanding that if I am no longer in state service, and I refund my account and receive only my employee contributions plus interest, that I am exempt from WEP/GPO as long as I do this prior to reaching my earliest eligible age to retire. The key appears to be that if payments include any employer contributions, then one IS subject to these federal provisions, unless one forfeits all rights to the state pension by taking a refund of their contributions prior to first date of pension eligibility.
Mr. Kraska,
Thank you for your question. You should contact your local Social Security office for assistance.
Julie, OPERS
Thanks to everyone involved getting this fixed. When I first discovered the Windfall Elimination Provision, I couldn’t believe it. Funny, no ever told you up front when becoming a public employee the Windfall Elimination Provision would impact you. It’s more of a surprise when you start considering retirement. I hope that this unfair rule is repealed and those that have put in to the system enjoys the fruits of their labors. Thanks again for those who are looking out for public employees.
I started working at age 16 in a job that paid into social security, had some 25 years in. Went to college later in life and was able to get a position with the state of Ohio and worked it for 23 years before retiring. My social security is greatly reduced also . Have been a divorced woman for 30 years and raised a daughter with no financial support from her father. Life was difficult but we made it with no frills.
Mr. Collins, I just received a letter from social security requesting information to determine if I am entitled to SS widow’s benefits. Of course I am! My husband of over 51 years died on August 4, 2017 & I am still grieving my sweetie’s death and now suffering from uterine cancer w/o my sweetheart. Shortly after his death SS wrote me, writing in the first paragraph, that I qualify for widow’s benefits. I was relieved because I could now make my monthly bills. Then I read down further in the letter and it stated that b/c of my 22 years in OPERS, I cannot receive it…even though I worked in low paying jobs in private industry paying into SS for 28 years. I’ve been requested to send proof of my gross amount of my OPERS pension. I believe, since I’ve been a vocal advocate, as well as sending frequent correspondence, for the repeal of the WEP/GPO SS is just doing this to pacify me and shut me up. It won’t work. I will continue my quest to right this wrong. I ask that if not for me, since I don’t know how long I’ll be around, then for my OPERS colleagues that are being punished, that this punitive law be repealed immediately. All that ever happens is that the bill is introduced, receives some co-signers and gets sent to the Ways and Means Committee to DIE. Thank you sir.
We’re sorry for your loss of your husband. We continue to advocate for the reform of GPO and WEP in Congress. Ultimately resolving that issue is in the hands of our representatives in Washington.
Julie, OPERS
Thank you very much for the up date.
I would be happy if they would just cut me a check for the amount I paid in plus a reasonable amount of interest. I don’t understand why a person who gets a pension from a private company will get their full social security benefit while a public employee gets the benefit cut.
OPERS continues to support the reform of GPO and WEP.
Julie
I just Retireed from a opers job at age 66 .I worked under ss from the age of 16 to 43 before that on and off I had 40 credits .I applied for ss last February and started getting it and was told that when I Retired it would be cut 40% when I retire because of the Windfall so I thought ok at least I would have some money left to help pay for my meds .Well when l told SS how much I was getting on my Retirement check they said I make to much money and I am not initiled to any ss they toke me hole check I fill like all the years I worked under ss was a waste I was only getting $823 00 from and $1.995. From opera I don’t understand how this works Dorothy Pemberton
Dorothy,
The Government Pension Offset and Windfall Elimination Provision are policies administered by the Social Security Administration, not OPERS. Since we do not administer these provisions, we are unable to provide assistance. If you have questions about GPO or WEP, we recommend contacting your local Social Security office or access its website at ssa.gov.
Julie, OPERS
I am 73 years old and am still working full time because of the reduction in my Social Security benefit. I taught 18 years in a parochial school. I clear just $350 a month pension. I make approximately $1000 a month in Social Security benefits to help with the poor diocesan pension amount. I have had a county job for 19 years. I also have 3 years under STRS and one more year under OPERS totaling 23 years. Since I can’t add my 18 years of teaching for the Diocese to my county pension, I will not have a big OPERS pension. I need my whole Social Security amount to cover the cost of health insurance that I will need to pay. What I don’t understand is why Ohio is one of a few states who still uses the Windfall Tax when most of the states do not. Why should I have to be penalized because I live in Ohio when Social Security is a federal program? I plan on retiring in January of 2021, but I am worried about covering all of my bills and still have some money left over for things that aren’t necessary. My husband is a retired firefighter and does not have enough quarters in Social Security to worry about.
Margaret,
Ohio doesn’t really “use” the Windfall Elimination Provision. Rather, it applies to many Ohio retirees because public workers here don’t contribute to Social Security retirement. So if they have a history of employment in the private sector, where they have contribute to Social Security, the federal government can reduce the workers’ Social Security benefit.
Indeed, Ohio does have the largest number of non-Social Security-covered public employees in the country. Thus, OPERS has endorsed two WEP reform bills currently in the U.S. House of Representatives, but their progress this year is uncertain. We hope to post an update soon on PERSpective.
Hi Michael, Are there any updates on the WEP reform bills currently in the US House of Representatives? Thanks in advance for your help with this request.
Tom
Tom,
We noticed that Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) just reintroduced his repeal bill. But as for the bills we most recently endorsed (in 2019), we have not heard anything new. We’ll plan to post a separate blog updating this situation when we can in the coming weeks.
Please find out exactly what is in this bill (i.e. HR # ???) and how modifications are calculated or determined.
Thank you.
Michael,
The bill you’re asking about is H.R. 82, the Social Security Fairness Act of 2021. Here’s where you can read more about it.
I don’t care how it gets “sugar coated”. I worked for around 17 years in SS and 25 years in OPERS & contributed to both as I worked. Yet, someone can come up with some “formula” that states I only get about 55% of my social security because I also receive a state retirement plan! I worked many hours for both those benefits and I should be able to receive the full amount, not a portion someone thinks I am titled too. Very unfair. Also, if I die first any balance left in my account does not go to my spouse! So who’s pocket does it go into?
Connie,
Both OPERS and Social Security provide survivor benefits. Here’s a link to our Survivor Benefits leaflet. Refer to Social Security’s website for information about its benefits.
I agree with the State. I am retired from the great State of Ohio. I also worked many, many, years in the private sector. My late husband died at age 60 and worked in the private sector his whole life. Where did all of our money go?
I agree that this is not fair. OPERS is not serving their members by not getting this crazy law changed. They should do this immediately especially since they are making changes to our health care benefits in 2022. Shameful that you let this windfall tax ever happen.
D
Diana,
OPERS didn’t make the WEP happen or allow it to happen. It was enacted by the federal government in the 1983. We have steadfastly supported efforts to change the provision but do not have the power to make changes on our own.
My husband worked and paid into social security. I believe that I am entitled to widows benefits and my retirement, which I worked for, should not stop me from receiving his social security.
I worked 18 years under a Social security and 24 under Pers. That 40% that taken from my SS should be retro. Stop giving our money to all the lazy people who sit around and collect our money that we earned
Peggy,
The WEP and GPO are Social Security’s rules, not ours. However, we have consistently advocated for changes in these provisions.
The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP), was enacted in 1983. Why are my wages from 1975 to 1979 causing my social security to be penalized? Had I known then that 4 years later they were going to enact WEP; I would not have taken time off for the birth of my children, and tried to get a job that paid what men were making. WEP is unfair to a woman our pay has always been less than men’s. I worked 34 years in S.S. but did not make the cut because in the 6 years I took time off to have my children and I did not make as much as a man. I am sure when this rule was put in to affect the fact that women made less than men and have the children were not taken in to thought. I call this discrimination against women!
Lori,
If you have 34 full years in Social Security, your OPERS pension should not be affected by WEP. You might want to call your local Social Security office to discuss this point.
Its not fair . Got to be a better way. I worked 30 years under Opers and 16 years under private sector.
I worked in S.S for 34 years only 28 years met the criteria. because as a female I was low paid and had children even though those years were before the WEP was started.
OPERS is in continual communication with the members of the Ohio congressional delegation, advocating in favor of legislation and policies that improve our members’ retirement security, including WEP/GPO relief.
I was suppose to get 800 a month and after WEP I get 400 a month .
Totally unfair and should be a total repeal of this unjust program !!
Repeal !! Repeal !! Repeal !! ASAP !!
I was supposed to get $1200 a month. I only get $300 a month. They took the money from me at 100% rate but only give me 25%. Politicians, I wonder if it happened to them how quickly the laws would change.
Thank you for your efforts in negotiating HR711. I worked until I reached 70 years old and found that half of my SS was off set by my PERS. I didn’t realize that could happen. My position was moved out of state which forced me to get a job with our county. I really appreciate your efforts on HR711.
I am affected by the WEP and GPO, having worked in OPERS for ~7 years.
I would not support anything other than full repeal of proposed WEP (and GPO) legislation. Please pass my comments along.
Very short version:
Shown Here:
Introduced in House (01/04/2021)
Social Security Fairness Act of 2021
This bill repeals provisions that reduce Social Security benefits for individuals who receive other benefits, such as a pension from a state or local government.
The bill eliminates the government pension offset, which in various instances reduces Social Security survivors’ benefits for spouses, widows, and widowers who also receive government pensions of their own.
The bill also eliminates the windfall elimination provision, which in some instances reduces Social Security benefits for individuals who also receive a pension or disability benefit from an employer that did not withhold Social Security taxes.
These changes are effective for benefits payable after December 2021.
More info: (copied from Rep. Davis’ web site)
Davis Re-Introduces Bipartisan Social Security Fairness Act
H.R. 82 ensures public employees like police officers or teachers receive the full Social Security benefits they’ve earned from private sector work
Washington, D.C., January 19, 2021
Earlier this month, U.S. Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) re-introduced H.R. 82, the bipartisan Social Security Fairness Act (SSFA), which eliminates the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO), two titles of the Social Security Act that unfairly reduce or eliminate Social Security benefits for millions of Americans who have devoted much of their careers to public service. Co-leading the legislation with Rep. Davis is Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA). The legislation currently has 21 bipartisan co-sponsors. In the last session of Congress, Davis organized a bipartisan group of 264 co-sponsors of the legislation.
Is anyone still working on this? A lot of us retirees will surely pass away before anything is passed.
Peg,
OPERS has been working on the WEP issue for many years. During the last session of Congress, OPERS endorsed two pieces of legislation that would reform the WEP and provide a measure of relief for our members and retirees who have been impacted by the offset.
Thanks to all of you at OPERS. I appreciate all that you are doing.
Biden says he is doing away with WEP .We will see what happens .
We can only hope that will happen
it is going to take more the OPERS to address this. I’ve written to our state reps in the house and congress – we all need to do this to bring a collective voice to the issue – it is a totally unfair practice that needs to get fixed. Those who have worked under both systems should get what they deserve – they paid into these funds, they should get the full benefit of doing so.
But the funny part is if you have a pension from some other company. No one touches that. You get the full amount.
Erich,
Presumably one would be paying into Social Security retirement if they belonged to a private pension plan, so yes, Social Security would not reduce its benefit in that case.
All that does is lose more of the money could have got. It will not matter if you are drawing it or not at the time they change it.
VIA benifits is a broke system. Only want to sell supplemental insurance. Waste your time on hold. Push you to use marketplace. Not knowledgeable about insurance in local areas. Cannot give prescription costs, prefer pharmacy, etc. Now line says wait till December. So expensive, 8,700. max out of pocket.
Why can’t they do it as a simple percentage. I worked 18 years county but didn’t make much ss. as I didn’t make much per hour then. My county job shut down due to the government. I’m 63 and if I retire at 67 I will get 779.00 from opers. My ss. would be 520 and ss takes 479.00.
I fully agree with you Thomas, If the goverment would stop using the Social Security funds for every thing coming and going maybe then people who have worked and paid into both social security and or another private sector are getting ripped . I for one worked in both and lost 50% or more of my social security when I retired. I would like to see some of them live on what some of us are drawing each month.
Why didn’t OPERS educate employees on this issue? I would have gladly paid into SS. I didn’t find out until I was in my 60’s. I’ve worked 15.5 years OPERS and over 20 years in private. Why aren’t we told about this when we start state service? I would not have gone into state service had I known about the injustices.
Rebecca,
There is information about the Social Security provisions in the OPERS Member Handbook, as well as the Retiring from OPERS section of our website. Plus, we’ve written several blogs about them in PERSpective.