Updated Friday, August 1, 2014 as of 8:30 PM ET
Blogs - The Informed Advisor
Social Security: Government Workers' Benefits May Be Smaller Than Expected
Monday, April 14, 2014

Retirees who have been government workers or whose spouses have been government workers may be in for a surprise when they file for Social Security retirement benefits. What they may not realize is that the benefit values listed on page two of their Social Security statement (downloadable at SSA.gov) are estimates only. These estimates can differ significantly from their actual benefits due to the effect of government employment.

There are two provisions to the administration of Social Security benefits, which may significantly reduce retirement benefits received by state or local government employees, such as teachers, police, firefighters or other government workers. The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) regulates the benefit received by the worker. The Government Pension Offset (GPO) is a separate provision, which regulates the spousal benefits being claimed by the spouse of a government worker.

First, a little background. In 1983, Congress enacted a number of modifications to the Social Security program to shore up the system in anticipation of the eventual Baby Boomer retirement wave. These changes included increasing the payroll tax, causing today’s dramatic increase in the Social Security Trust Fund and the Windfall Elimination Provision.

The WEP potentially limits benefits paid out to a public-sector worker who is eligible for other government pensions for wages where they did not pay payroll tax. Since Social Security was designed to provide a safety net of income—not a defined benefit—Congress felt that the system was justified to limit benefits in situations where workers were already collecting substantial government pensions from state or local governments. The WEP does not apply to federal government employees who started work after 1983.

Usually, but not always, when a person works at a local or state government job offering a pension, they do not pay Social Security taxes. This worker would see many “zeroes” for annual income on page 3 of their statement. This should be a warning sign to expect a reduction in anticipated benefits and a good thing for planners to review with clients.

The actual reductions are limited by a number of factors, one being the years of paying Social Security payroll tax. Benefits are always based on the highest 35 years of inflation-adjusted income. The actual amount of the WEP reduction is based on a sliding scale depending on the number of years that the worker reported wages with payroll tax withheld. In 2014, the greatest possible WEP reduction was $408/month for a worker with 20 years or less of Social Security payroll tax wages. If a worker had 30 years or more of these wages, there is no WEP reduction. Between 20 and 30 years of payroll tax wages, the reduction is modified proportionally.

Example 1:

A 65-year-old worker was a teacher for 17 years paying no Social Security payroll tax. He worked for another 20 years in other jobs paying payroll tax. His current recent statement estimates an age 66 full retirement age benefit of $926. His approximate reduction would be $408, and his actual benefit would be approximately $518 ($926 – 408). If he worked five more years in another job that paid Social Security payroll tax, the reduction would only be $204 and his benefit would be $702.

The WEP reduction, however, cannot be more than one-half of the amount of a worker’s public sector pension.

Example 2:

A worker had a teacher’s pension of $600/month and an estimated benefit at full retirement age of $1,423/month. He also worked 20 years paying Social Security payroll taxes. The maximum WEP reduction of his benefit would be $300 (half of $600), not $408, regardless of how few years he paid payroll taxes. His benefit would be $1,123 ($1,423 - $300). His teacher’s pension would still be $600/month.

Example 3:

What about the spouse? Her benefits would, of course, be affected. If the spouse applied for benefits at her full retirement age, she would be eligible as usual for half of the worker’s full retirement age benefit, except that now the worker’s benefits have been reduced. In Example 1 above, the spousal benefit would be $256/month (half of $518), if the husband paid 20 years of payroll taxes, $351 (half of $702) for 25 years, or $463 (half of $926), if he paid 30 or more years of payroll taxes.

Importantly, the survivor benefit for the spouse is not affected by the WEP. In other words, when the husband passes away, the wife will collect the full survivor benefit equal to the husband’s full benefit of $926 regardless of how much of a WEP had been applied during his lifetime. Essentially the WEP passes away when the worker does.
Remember, the feature that triggers a WEP reduction is not paying SS payroll taxes. Public-sector workers are the most common example of this situation, but the fact that they are public-sector workers, in itself, does not trigger the WEP.

In an upcoming post, I will review the other side of the coin, The Government Pension Offset. This provision potentially reduces spousal benefits when the spouse is the one who has significant non-Social Security payroll tax earnings and a public sector pension.

Paul Norr is a financial planner in Thousand Oaks, Calif., and writes about planning and retirement. His website is www.paulnorr.com.


Read More:

(2) Comments
I am questioning this sentence: If a worker had 30 years or more of these wages, there is no WEP reduction.

I am an federal employee with 34 yrs of government employment. Iwill turn 55 yrs old in October of this year.

I plan to retire this year Dec. 30th.

I did work 'partime' in my late teens and 20's - earning 23 credits toward social security. I would need 17 more credits (apprx 4.5 yrs) of private sec employment to qualify of social security benefits. I did make an appointment with SS and found that if I did earn the 17 credits and when I am 66 and 10 months old I could draw SS and it would be an approx $91.23 a month. To me it is not worth while for me to earn 17 credits after I retire this year.

So, are you saying with my government pension of 34.6 yrs. I would not fall in the 'windfall' program?

Posted by Donna K | Monday, June 09 2014 at 11:48AM ET
Today, one in five Americans is unemployed, underemployed or just plain out of work. In May the U.S. unemployment rate remained unchanged at 6.3%, averaging 6.52% for the year seasonally adjusted. I think this is very crucial situation and government must do something, create new jobs or somehow protect unemployed. If you have lost job, don't become depressed, just sit and think what can you do to get new job. Sometimes resume helps to get an interview and job, too. The only thing you need is to submit good resume. If you don't know how to do this, resort to ResumeWritingLab. The professionals will help you to submit perfect resume and provide with all necessary information on how to write CV/over letter,and more.
Posted by Katy J | Thursday, June 26 2014 at 4:35PM ET
Post a Comment
You must be registered to post a comment.
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.
Already registered? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.
2014 Summer Reading List for Advisors

Current Issue

The June Issue is now online!


Industry Events

August 10, 2014 |

September 9, 2014 |

September 17, 2014 |

September 20, 2014 |

September 28, 2014 |

Already a subscriber? Log in here