As someone who just went through this exact situation, I can confirm that those zeros are completely normal and expected. I worked for a municipal government for 7 years and every single year showed $0 on my Social Security statement despite earning a decent salary. What really helped me understand the bigger picture was learning that Social Security benefits are based on your highest 35 years of earnings. Since you already have 15 years of covered employment, you're ahead of many government workers who start their careers in non-covered positions. The key is whether you'll eventually have enough substantial earnings years to minimize WEP impact. One thing I wish I'd known earlier: if you're planning to stay in government work long-term, consider whether you can pick up any freelance or consulting work on the side that pays into Social Security. Even earning just above the substantial earnings threshold ($31,275 for 2025) in a given year counts as a full year toward reducing WEP. I started doing some weekend consulting work in my field, and it's been a good way to build up additional covered earnings while still benefiting from my government pension. Also, don't stress too much about those "gap" years - they're only gaps in your SS record, not in your actual work history. Your pension system will have complete records of your government service, which is what matters for that benefit.

You all know that WEP was repealed retroactive to January 2024 right?

One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is timing - since you've been on LTD for 8 months already, you actually have some flexibility in when you apply for SSDI. While your LTD policy probably requires you to apply, most give you a reasonable timeframe (usually within 12-24 months of becoming disabled). This gives you time to make sure your medical documentation is rock solid before submitting. Don't rush into applying just because you're worried about the process - a well-documented initial application has a much better chance of approval than a hastily prepared one that gets denied and has to go through appeals. Also, keep in mind that SSDI has a "closed period" option if you think you might eventually return to work. This lets you claim benefits for a specific time period when you were disabled, rather than claiming ongoing disability. Given that you're dealing with accident injuries that might heal over time, this could be worth discussing with a disability attorney.

Does private short term disability paid as wages count as earned income towards earning limits for a 64 year old?

Welcome to the community, Giovanni! It's great to see another person making an informed decision based on all the excellent experiences shared here. You're absolutely right about the consistency of advice from people who've actually been through this process - that unanimity really speaks volumes about which option typically makes more financial sense. The survivor benefit angle you mentioned is such an important consideration that doesn't always get the attention it deserves in these discussions. With your spouse being 4 years younger, those enhanced DRCs could indeed provide significant additional security for her future. It's one of those factors that makes the long-term value of preserving DRCs even more compelling than just the personal benefit calculation. Your point about tax efficiency is spot-on too. Taking a lump sum of retroactive benefits when you're already managing other retirement income can create unnecessary tax complications. The higher monthly payments spread over time are usually much more manageable from a tax planning perspective. Best of luck with your application next week! Make sure to take screenshots of your responses (especially that retroactive benefits section) as others have suggested. It sounds like you're well-prepared to make the choice that will serve you and your spouse best in the long run. Thanks for adding your perspective to this incredibly helpful discussion!

This has been such an incredibly informative discussion! I've been reading through everyone's experiences and advice, and I'm feeling much more confident about my decision now. Based on all the real-world examples shared here - from Aisha's $160/month increase to Emma's $140+ boost - it's clear that preserving those DRCs is typically the smarter long-term financial choice. The math consistently shows that for someone in decent health expecting normal longevity, those delayed retirement credits are worth significantly more over a lifetime than a one-time retroactive payment. The additional considerations people brought up really sealed the deal for me: - Tax efficiency of higher monthly payments vs. a lump sum - How DRCs compound with future COLAs - The impact on survivor benefits for my spouse - The peace of mind of guaranteed higher monthly income I'm planning to apply online this week and will definitely be declining the retroactive benefits to preserve my DRCs. I'll make sure to take screenshots of every page (especially that retroactive benefits section) as several people recommended. Thank you all for sharing your knowledge and real experiences - this community has been absolutely invaluable in helping me understand the nuances of this decision that I never would have figured out on my own. The consistency of advice from people who've actually been through this process really gives me confidence I'm making the right choice for my long-term financial security!

I'm new to this community and currently preparing to apply for Social Security benefits myself. This entire discussion has been incredibly helpful! I have a previous marriage that lasted about 5 years, and I was really anxious about whether including it would complicate my application unnecessarily. After reading through all these detailed real-world experiences, I feel so much more confident about the process. The consistent message from everyone who's actually been through this is clear - be honest, answer "yes" to previous marriages, provide the basic information when prompted (dates, spouse name, how it ended), and trust the online system to handle marriages under 10 years appropriately. It's particularly reassuring to see recent success stories from people like Ayla, Finnegan, and Aaron who just went through this process smoothly. The fact that the system automatically calculates duration and notes that short marriages don't affect benefits without requiring documentation makes this so much less stressful than I anticipated. For those experiencing the red error bug that prevents submission - that definitely sounds like a technical issue SSA needs to address! You shouldn't have to omit accurate information just to get around a system glitch. Thank you to everyone who took the time to share their experiences here. This community is amazing for providing practical guidance that you simply can't find in the official SSA documentation. You've all made this process much less intimidating for newcomers like me!

Thank you all for your help. I did hit yes for prior marriage and it just asked if it lasted 10 years or more. It didn't ask for dates nor a name, though, I did put that name for a prior name. I did finish it and it did state that they needed proof of your marriage, which one? They will contact me if they need any document of it. My husband did not need to provide anything on his, no since like me I thought it was one that lasted 10 years or more. He has never been contacted.

I've been following this thread closely because I'm in a somewhat similar situation, and I wanted to add a few thoughts based on my own research and experience navigating SSA. First, regarding the conflicting information you've gotten from SSA representatives - this is unfortunately very common with complex scenarios like yours. The rules around divorced spousal benefits, child-in-care provisions, and deemed filing are intricate, and not all phone representatives are equally knowledgeable about these nuances. I'd strongly recommend requesting to speak with a supervisor or scheduling an in-person appointment at your local SSA office where you can bring documentation and get more detailed assistance. Second, while everyone's correctly pointed out the deemed filing issue, I want to emphasize something that might give you some hope: the earnings test is only temporary. If you did decide to file for benefits now (despite the reduction), once you reach full retirement age at 67, SSA will recalculate your benefits to remove the reduction caused by the earnings test (though not the early filing reduction). This is called the "adjustment of reduction factor." Finally, don't overlook the possibility of appealing or requesting reconsideration if you receive information from SSA that doesn't seem right. Given how many different answers you've gotten, it might be worth getting a formal written determination that you can review carefully or have an attorney look at. The system is complicated, but you're asking all the right questions. Keep advocating for yourself and your child!

yes! child in care benefit are the exception to deem rule and do no effect your own retirement. Exceptions to deemed filing Regardless of the claimant’s DOB, you must consider the following two exceptions before applying deemed filing: a.  Child-in-care (C-I-C) A claimant who has in their care a child (under age 16 or disabled) entitled to a child’s insurance benefit on their spouse’s earnings record, and is filing for spouse's benefits is not deemed to have filed for RIB. They may exclude RIB from the scope of the application for spouse's benefits by providing an unequivocal statement.