Bill Introduced to Eradicate Current Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)
(Source: House Ways and Means Committee Press Release)
Brady, Neal Introduce Legislation to Ensure Equal Treatment for Teachers, Firefighters, Police Officers, and Other Public Servants When It Comes to Social Security
Washington, D.C. – This week, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-TX) and Ranking Member Richard Neal (D-MA) introduced H.R. 6933, the Equal Treatment of Public Servants Act of 2018. This legislation finally gets rid of Social Security’s Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and replaces it with a new formula that makes sure that teachers, firefighters, police officers, and other public servants receive a Social Security benefit that is based on their actual work history. The legislation reflects ongoing conversations with stakeholders since the introduction of the previous version of the bill in the 114th Congress and is intended to facilitate further discussion and analysis.
Upon introduction of this bill, Chairman Brady and Ranking Member Neal released the following statement:
“Introduced by the two of us, this bill is intended to provide relief from the WEP for affected individuals in Texas, Massachusetts, and the rest of the country. Workers nationwide pay into Social Security with the expectation that they will receive the benefits they’ve earned when they retire. As we have known for some time, WEP, though well intentioned, has treated many of our public servants unfairly. This legislation is part of continued efforts to ensure that public servants who earn both a Social Security benefit and a pension from a Social Security substitute are treated fairly when it comes to Social Security.
“We know there is room for improvement, and we encourage feedback on the bill as work continues to address the WEP. It’s time to stand up for our teachers, firefighters, and police officers in our states and all across the country.”
Stakeholders are encouraged to send feedback to: WEP.feedback@mail.house.gov.
Notice: The links provided above connect readers to the sources described in the post. The URLs (internet addresses) for these links are valid on the posted date; socialsecurityreport.org cannot guarantee the duration of the links’ validity. Also, the opinions expressed in these postings are the viewpoints of the original source and are not explicitly endorsed by AMAC, Inc.; the AMAC Foundation, Inc.; or socialsecurityreport.org.
I am a retired Texas community college teacher. My state pension was a bit too high to allow me to collect *any* of my social security benefits. Under the new bill, would I now be able to get the social security benefits that I paid into? I get my ss statement every year, but those benefits have always been denied me.
Worried in Houston.
Paul:
The House of Representatives passed HR 82 (“Social Security Fairness Act of 2023”) this week, but the bill must still pass a vote in the Senate. At this point we do not know when or if that will occur in the current congressional session. If it passes and is signed into law, it would repeal both the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO) sections of the Social Security rulebook. This excerpt from issuevoter.org resents a summary explanation of the bill: “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 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.”
So, if the bill is enacted, there would no longer be a reduction in Social Security benefits new retirees having non-covered earnings in their work record, and the existence of pensions from government employment would no longer be taken into account for spouses, widows, and widowers.
To the best of our knowledge, H.R. 82 does not contain retroactivity and would only affect new claimants. The date of actual implementation would be set when and if the bill is signed into law. Also, with respect to your situation, it’s important to note that WEP cannot eliminate a Social Security benefit completely, only reduce it. A WEP reduction cannot be more than 50% of non-covered pension.
If you have any questions about your situation, please contact our free Social Security Advisory Service at 888-750-2622 or via email at SSAdvisor@amacfoundation.org.
Thanks for your comments.
Gerry Hafer
Certified Social Security Advisor
The AMAC Foundation
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this message, including any attachments, are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the person or entity to whom the message was addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please be advised that any dissemination, distribution, forwarding, printing, copying, or use of the contents of this message, and any attached documentation, is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender. Please also permanently delete all copies of the original message and any attached documentation. The opinions and interpretations expressed in this message are the viewpoints of the message’s author, a trained advisor accredited under the National Social Security Advisors program of the National Social Security Association, LLC (NSSA). The author, the NSSA, and the AMAC Foundation are not affiliated with or endorsed by the United States Government, the Social Security Administration, or any other state agency.
I am in the process of planning my retirement from the University of Massachusetts system.
I won’t be receiving full retirement benefits from the system because I worked in the private sector until age 40. I also won’t receive my full social security benefit which I also worked for. It hardly seems fair to punish people who’ve worked a number of years under social security and eliminate a large portion of their benefit. It’s not like the state is “giving me a retirement – I pay 10% of my salary into that system.
Unless I am missing something, this law does not adequately address the folks who are already being punished under the 1983 wep law. The wep law needs to be repealed not band- aided, for certain groups.
I have worked most of my life and yet 1/2 of my ss benefits are being withheld. My civil svc pension(fed gov) is not a large one and I cannot survive on what I get. I am basically poverty level, thanks to the help of our politicians circa 1983 and post 1983, as they are not seriously interested in undoing a poorly thought out law, which punishes life long wage earners.
Contrary to what we are told, lower wage earners are actually hurt worse in this wep nightmare.
I have always been a lower wage earner, no matter where I worked (civil svc or under ss cov jobs). I have not been able to routinely meet the required (high) substantial earnings yearly, that keep going up yearly.
It does not matter that I have more than met the required ss quarters of coverage most years. All those yrs are dismissed for wep purposes, because they are not considered substantial per the wep law.
Now that I am a Sr., employers do not want to hire me for a living wage, let alone the substantial earnings amt and they are in fact getting rid of more and more Sr. workers across the U.S. (Another huge problem (ageism), that is not being addressed, by our politicians.)
We have a generation of people, who are being driven into poverty because of this law, unless they were higher wage earners with enough income to meet their needs as they aged.
Perhaps our politicians are just playing the waiting game until we all die.
My niece graduated 3 years ago and began her teaching career. After teaching 2 years she learned that she was only working to destroy her spouse benefits from Social security, as well as her own. She has quit teaching. Smart girl ! A huge loss for the State of Texas and parents of school age children.
I’m a support staff member at a local school district and face the same dilemma. Why work a part time job as I near retirement just to negate my social security earnings? I paid in to social security in my former career, unlike so many SSI recipients. Good luck finding a caring individual to get to school at 6:30 am to cook school children a hot breakfast and lunch. I should have 100% of what I earned from paying into SS for 20 years !
I worked in the private sector for 15 years. I started working for the Louisiana Department of Corrections in 1989. I worked for 27 yeas and retired. I was looking forward to receiving my Social Security to implement my retirement, however that did not happen. I receive less that 60% of my social security because of the WEP provision. I have since returned to work part time so as to supplement my income. My husband has heart disease and is on a number of medications and I needed to find some way to help in paying for the extra expenses. I am now 70 years old and still working and feel that I worked those 15 years so that I would not have to work again. I feel that I earned the privilege to receive my social security as I worked for it. We should not be penalized by WEP.
I sure do hope that your efforts to help are fruitful. Let me say that you are the only voice we have and do appreciate your service.
I worked 20 years(1972-1991) in the private sector in construction and as a heavy equipment operator. This is not easy work and it took a lot of my time traveling to and from jobs. I started working for the Colorado department of Corrections in 1991 to 2016. I am now retired from the prison system and was told that I will not receive all my S.S. benefit that I earned due to WEP & GPO. I worked hard for the small S.S. benefits I should receive but, because I worked for the Sate of Colorado, I do not get it. I am loosing $381.00 a month due to WEP & GPO. As a retiree and not getting any raises, I was counting on my S.S. benefits that I earned to help me make ends meet. I need the benefits I earned. It is only fair.
Jim:
AMAC has been advocating for Social Security changes for many years, and has been resolute in calling lawmakers’ attention to the need for (1) changes to address the long-term solvency problem facing the program, and (2) formula adjustments that can achieve better equalization of benefits for all beneficiaries. In fact, in an earlier edition of AMAC’s Social Security Guarantee Act, we supported complete repeal of both WEP and GPO as part of a compromise that would promise long-term solvency. This latter point was dropped from the Guarantee framework, along with several other adjustments that we feel are appropriate. Despite their removal from the current proposal now being advocated, AMAC continues to collect supporting commentary for use in the future when negotiations unfold. In other words, we haven’t given up, but we well recognize that these types of adjustments must be offset by savings or income improvements in other areas of Social Security reform.
In the meantime, thanks again for your thoughts, we sincerely appreciate hearing from our readers.
Gerry Hafer
AMAC Foundation, Inc.
Notice: The opinions and interpretations expressed in this message are the viewpoints of the message’s author, a trained advisor accredited under the National Social Security Advisors program of the National Social Security Association, LLC (NSSA). The author, the NSSA, and the AMAC Foundation are not affiliated with or endorsed by the United States Government, the Social Security Administration, or any other state government.
My Professional Career was in Education. I worked at Texas A&M University for nine years and paid both Social Security and Texas Teacher Retirement. Also, I served 11 years as an elected Justice Peace on which I paid Social Security. Because I am eligible for Social Security, I only get 55% of what I am eligible because of the WEP Provision.
I am currently retired after working 56 years in various fields of Education, and I would gladly support your efforts to enact H.R. 6933. Thank You for your dedicated service to our country.