

Ask the community...
Just to provide a bit more clarity on the technical side: Under current law, the WEP reduction is capped at no more than 50% of your husband's non-covered pension (his state pension). So sometimes the actual reduction is less than the maximum WEP amount I mentioned earlier. Also, remember that for GPO, the current reduction is 2/3 of his government pension amount. So when calculating potential benefits after a repeal, you'd need to add back that reduction to see the full impact. One other point - while many commenters are skeptical about legislative action, there has been more bipartisan support recently due to teacher and first responder advocacy groups pushing hard for these changes. The proposed Social Security Fairness Act has gained significant traction in the current session.
Thank you for the additional details. The 50% cap on WEP reduction is interesting - I didn't know that. His state pension will be around $2,800/month, so I guess that means his WEP reduction couldn't be more than $1,400 anyway? I'm trying not to get my hopes up too much about the legislation passing, but it would certainly be life-changing for us and many others in similar situations if it does.
my friend's husband was in same situation exact situation and they got so confused they hired a financial advisor just to figure out all this GPO/WEP stuff!!! cost them $500 but they said it was worth it just to understand what they'd actually get. might be worth considering if you can afford it
btw don't forget about social security earnings test if you claim before your FRA... that caught me by surprise when i retired!!! has nothing to do with WEP but another thing to remember
As someone who's been through this exact situation, here's what I'd advise: 1. Calculate your expected state pension after 10-15 years of service 2. Compare that to potential private sector salary + full SS benefits 3. Factor in healthcare benefits, which are often superior in state jobs In my case, even with WEP reducing my Social Security by about $520/month, my state pension more than made up for it. The healthcare benefits alone saved me thousands annually. The strategy of returning to private work can mathematically reduce WEP impact, but it's generally not worth the career disruption. Each year of substantial earnings beyond 20 years reduces WEP by 5%, but that might mean only $30-35 more per month in benefits for each additional year. Focus less on maximizing SS and more on total retirement income including pension, savings, and healthcare costs.
It might be simpler, but it wouldn't maximize her lifetime benefits. By taking her own reduced retirement benefits now and switching to full survivor benefits at FRA, she'll get some income now PLUS the maximum survivor benefit later. If she took survivor benefits now, they would be permanently reduced. In her specific situation (where her husband was the higher earner), this strategy often results in tens of thousands of dollars more over her lifetime. The exact difference depends on benefit amounts and life expectancy, but it's usually significant enough to justify the more complex approach.
When you do make the switch at 67, start the process at least 3 months before your birthday. I waited until the month of my FRA to switch strategies, and there was a gap in my payments that created some financial stress. The SSA backdated everything eventually, but I went almost 2 months without any benefits while they processed the change. Just something to plan for.
The earnings limit is SUCH A HEADACHE! My advice? Have your husband tell his boss he needs to be paid MONTHLY, with the pay periods matching calendar months. That would solve everything. Not sure why companies can't figure this out when so many older workers have this exact problem with Social Security!
Since several people mentioned reporting: Your husband should call Social Security at 1-800-772-1213 to report his return to work. Alternatively, he can report estimated earnings online through his my Social Security account or in person at a local office. For calculating his earnings during his first year of retirement, SSA uses the "Grace Year" rule. This means they'll look at his monthly earnings for the remainder of 2024. For each month he earns under the limit ($1,860), he'll receive his full benefit regardless of annual totals. Starting in 2025, SSA will switch to annual accounting. They'll estimate his expected earnings for the year and may adjust his benefits accordingly. If the estimate changes, he should update SSA to avoid overpayments. Keeping detailed records is absolutely critical - especially the breakdown of exactly which days' work falls into which calendar month.
Omar Zaki
Just wanted to add - make sure you're using the 2024 earnings limit for survivor benefits at age 60, which is $22,320. Sometimes people use the wrong limit by mistake. And remember that only earned income counts - not investments, pensions, etc.
0 coins
Javier Hernandez
•Yes, I'm using the correct limit for 2024. My earnings from my part-time job will be $22,339, which puts me $19 over. I don't have any other income that would count toward the limit.
0 coins
Freya Andersen
WAIT! If you're only claiming in November, isn't there some kind of first-year rule where they look at your monthly earnings instead of annual? I feel like there was something special about the first year you claim benefits...
0 coins
Ravi Patel
•You're thinking of the Grace Year rule, but the original poster already mentioned that the monthly calculations wouldn't help because their earnings are higher in November/December (the months they're claiming benefits). The monthly limit would be $1,860, and if they earn more than that in those months, the Grace Year provision wouldn't be beneficial in this case.
0 coins