

Ask the community...
@commenter above - No, it's 5% per year. The WEP penalty is reduced by 5% for each year of substantial earnings beyond 20 years. So at 20 years, the penalty is reduced by 5%, at 21 years by 10%, and so on until at 30 years, you reach a 50% reduction, effectively eliminating the WEP penalty entirely.
Thanks for clarifying! I must have been confusing it with something else.
Thanks everyone for all this helpful information! I think my takeaway is that unless I can earn enough to hit the substantial earnings threshold (which would be tough with just part-time work), there's minimal benefit to working just for Social Security purposes. I'm going to try that Claimyr service to get some specific calculations from SSA about my situation. It's definitely complicated juggling the WEP reduction on my own benefits with the potential GPO reduction on survivor benefits if my spouse passes before me. Feels like I'm being penalized twice for having a government pension, but at least now I understand the mechanics better.
To clarify for everyone: YES, the earnings test applies to ALL Social Security benefits taken before FRA - retirement, spousal, and survivor benefits. The 2025 limit is $22,320 if you're under FRA the whole year. They withhold $1 in benefits for every $2 earned above that limit. For the original poster: Since you earned so little last year and presumably will earn a similar amount this year, this won't affect you. But the SSA needs to verify that with documentation, hence the Schedule C request. You should be able to call and explain you don't have the Schedule C yet. They may accept alternative documentation or place a note on your record. And yes, once approved, you'll receive retroactive benefits to your application date.
thx for explaining! wish the ssa website made this clearer!
Just out of curiosity, have you considered waiting until your FRA to claim spousal benefits? The reduction for claiming early can be substantial - up to 35% less if you claim at 62 vs. FRA. Each year you wait, the monthly amount increases. Of course, there's the trade-off of getting smaller checks sooner versus larger checks later.
We actually did the math on this. Even with the reduction, I'd need to live past 82 for waiting to be the better financial choice in my specific situation. Plus we have some short-term expenses coming up, so the immediate income helps more than a larger amount later would. But it's definitely something everyone should calculate for their own situation!
One more important thing to consider: If her husband passes away while she's still working and earning income, the earnings test would apply to both spousal and survivor benefits if she's under FRA. For 2025, if she earns over $22,320 (estimated), benefits are reduced by $1 for every $2 earned above this limit. This won't affect her after she reaches FRA, but it's something to factor into her decision if she's still working. The reduction isn't permanent though - SSA recalculates and gives credit for these reductions once she reaches FRA.
Thank you everyone for such helpful and thoughtful responses. I spoke with my sister-in-law and she's decided to schedule an appointment with SSA to get the exact benefit amounts for her situation. Given her husband's prognosis and her current financial needs, she's leaning toward taking the reduced spousal benefit now, especially understanding that it won't impact her survivor benefits later. I've helped her make a list of questions to ask and documents to bring. This community has been incredibly helpful during a really difficult time.
One thing nobody's mentioned is she should immediately report this job to SSA if she hasn't already. Not reporting work activity can lead to overpayments that she'll have to pay back later. Better to address this proactively than wait for them to find out during a review.
Yes, we reported the job when she started three weeks ago! I made sure we did that right away. I just wasn't sure about how they calculate the income with the retirement deduction.
maybe she could ask the school if she can opt out of the retirement thing? some places let you do that especially for part time workers
Most public school pension systems are mandatory for all employees - it's not optional like a 401(k). It's actually a replacement for Social Security, not a supplement. This is why it's so important for the original poster to get specialized advice from SSA about non-covered employment.
Keisha Williams
my freind tole me that SS benefits have a maximum amount maybe u both hit the max?
0 coins
Paolo Rizzo
•There is a maximum benefit, but it's much higher than $2,876 for someone who reached full retirement age in 2025. For someone claiming at exactly FRA this year, the maximum would be approximately $3,900. So while this is a good thought, it's not the explanation in this case.
0 coins
PixelPioneer
After looking at all the responses, I think this is just one of those strange coincidences that can happen with the complex Social Security formula. Since multiple SSA representatives have confirmed your amounts are correct, and others here have experienced similar situations, I wouldn't worry about it. If it gives you peace of mind, you could schedule an in-person appointment at your local SSA office where they can pull up both records and show you the detailed calculations side by side. But it sounds like everything is working as intended, just with an unusual outcome!
0 coins
Yara Abboud
•Thank you all for the helpful responses! I think you're right - just a weird coincidence. I'll still try to get an in-person appointment to see the calculations side by side, but I'm feeling much better about it now. It's reassuring to hear others have experienced this too!
0 coins