Social Security calculation confusion - 30 or 35 years of earnings needed for maximum benefits?
I'm getting close to retirement age (turning 62 next April) and trying to understand exactly how my SS benefits will be calculated. I found an article that's confusing me about how many years of work history I need for maximum benefits. I always thought it was 30 years of substantial earnings, but this article says 35 years? Here's what it said: "When determining how much you'll receive each month, the SSA accounts for your 35 highest-earning, inflation-adjusted years. Keep in mind this means wages and salary and excludes investment income. The quirk to this calculation is that the SSA will penalize beneficiaries who don't have 35 years of qualifying work history. For every year less than 35 worked, $0 is averaged into your calculation. In other words, if you want to maximize what you'll receive from America's leading retirement program, working 35 years, if not longer, is a necessity." I've worked about 31 years total (with some gaps for raising kids), so now I'm worried my benefit will be reduced because I don't have the full 35 years. Can someone explain this? Are the 30 years and 35 years referring to different things?
20 comments
Sophia Rodriguez
You're mixing up two different things. The 35 years is correct for regular SS retirement benefits - SSA uses your highest 35 years of earnings to calculate your benefit amount. If you don't have 35 years, they'll use zeros for the missing years, which lowers your average. The 30 years of "substantial earnings" refers to something different - it's related to the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP), which affects people who worked jobs where they didn't pay into Social Security (like some government jobs). If you have 30+ years of substantial covered earnings under Social Security, the WEP reduction doesn't apply to you.
0 coins
James Johnson
•Oh! That makes so much more sense now. So for my regular retirement benefit, having only 31 years means they'll add 4 years of zeros to my calculation? How much will that affect my monthly payment roughly?
0 coins
Mia Green
The article is correct about the 35 years. Social Security retirement benefits are based on your highest 35 years of indexed earnings. If you only worked 31 years, then yes, 4 zeros will be factored into your average, which will lower your benefit somewhat. The 30 years you're thinking of relates to the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP), which is something completely different that affects people who worked in jobs not covered by Social Security (like certain government jobs). If you have 30+ years of substantial earnings under Social Security, you're exempt from WEP reductions. Have you created a my Social Security account at ssa.gov? It will show you your earnings history and give you a benefit estimate based on your actual work record.
0 coins
James Johnson
•Thank you for explaining this! I do have a mySocialSecurity account but wasn't sure how to interpret some of the information. I'll look at my earnings history again. Is there any way to calculate exactly how much those 4 missing years are reducing my benefit?
0 coins
Emma Bianchi
the article is right, its 35 yrs, sorry :( they take ur best 35 yrs and if u dont have 35 they put in zeros for the missing yrs. i only worked 28 yrs total cause of health issues and my benefit is reduced cuz of it
0 coins
James Johnson
•I'm sorry to hear about your health issues. Do you know roughly how much your benefit was reduced because of those missing years? I'm trying to figure out if I should try to work a few more years or just accept the reduction.
0 coins
Lucas Kowalski
Wait, so now I'm REALLY confused!!! I thought it was 40 quarters (10 years) to qualify for Social Security??? Now you're saying I need 35 years??? I've only worked about 25 years total my whole life - does that mean my SS check will be TINY??? I'm freaking out a little because I'm 59 and planned to retire at 62!
0 coins
Mia Green
•Don't panic! You're mixing up two different requirements: 1. You need 40 quarters (10 years) of earnings to QUALIFY for Social Security retirement benefits. You've met this with your 25 years of work. 2. The 35 years is just how they CALCULATE your benefit amount. They take your highest-earning 35 years, and if you don't have 35 years, they use zeros for the missing years. You'll still get a benefit with 25 years of work - it just won't be as high as someone with identical earnings who worked for 35+ years.
0 coins
Olivia Martinez
I struggled with this exact same confusion when I was planning my retirement! What I learned after HOURS on the phone with SSA (literally waited 3+ hours once): - YES, they use your top 35 years for the calculation - YES, they use $0 for any missing years if you have fewer than 35 - BUT it might not impact your benefit as much as you think In my case, my early working years were at such low wages compared to my later career that replacing those $0 years would have only increased my benefit by about $50/month. I decided it wasn't worth working 4 more years just for that small increase. If you're really struggling to get through to SSA to ask specific questions about your situation, I recommend trying Claimyr (claimyr.com). They got me connected to a real person at SSA in under 10 minutes after I had wasted days trying on my own. They have a video showing how it works: https://youtu.be/Z-BRbJw3puU
0 coins
James Johnson
•That's really helpful perspective, thank you! $50/month doesn't seem worth working 4 more years. I'll check out that service - I've been trying to get through to SSA for weeks with no luck. Did they answer your specific questions about how the calculation would affect you?
0 coins
Charlie Yang
BOTH articles are correct - 35 years for benefit calculation AND 30 years for WEP. Very different things! I worked as a teacher in a non-SS state for 15 years, then in SS-covered jobs for 25 years. I got hit with WEP reduction because I didn't have the full 30 years of substantial earnings to be exempt from WEP. BUT my regular SS calc also had 10 years of zeros (35-25=10). Double whammy!!
0 coins
Grace Patel
•This is exactly right. The 35-year calculation affects everyone, while the 30-year substantial earnings threshold only matters if you're subject to WEP. For the original poster: if all your work was in Social Security-covered employment, you only need to worry about the 35-year calculation. Each year of zeros will lower your benefit, but the impact depends on your earnings history.
0 coins
Grace Patel
To give you a more precise understanding: Your Social Security Primary Insurance Amount (PIA) is based on your Average Indexed Monthly Earnings (AIME) from your 35 highest-earning years. If you have fewer than 35 years, zeros are included in the calculation. The impact of those zeros depends on your earnings history. For someone with 31 years of steady earnings at the national average wage, having 4 years of zeros might reduce their benefit by approximately 11-13%. However, if your earnings were higher in your working years, the percentage reduction would be less significant. You can use the detailed calculator at SSA.gov to see exactly how different retirement ages and additional working years would affect your benefit amount. Look for the "Retirement Estimator" or the more detailed "Detailed Calculator" (which can be downloaded).
0 coins
James Johnson
•Thank you for the specific percentage estimate - that helps put it in perspective! 11-13% is substantial but not devastating. I'll check out those calculators. Do you know if those missing years affect the COLA adjustments I'll receive after I start collecting benefits?
0 coins
Emma Bianchi
my sis works at SSA and she said sometimes its better to just take ss at 62 even with less years worked cuz u collect for longer, depends on ur health n stuff
0 coins
Mia Green
•That's an important consideration, but it's a separate issue from the 35-year calculation. Whether to claim at 62 vs. waiting until Full Retirement Age (FRA) or age 70 is a complex decision that depends on health, financial needs, life expectancy, and other factors. Even with fewer than 35 years of earnings, someone might still be better off waiting until FRA or 70 to claim if they expect to live into their 80s or beyond.
0 coins
Sophia Rodriguez
Another thing to keep in mind - those zeros might not be as bad as you think. If your early career earnings were low (like mine were when I was waiting tables in the 80s), those years might not contribute much to your calculation anyway. The indexing they do tends to favor your later higher-earning years. So 4 zeros instead of 4 years of low earnings might only make a small difference.
0 coins
Lucas Kowalski
•So wait does that mean I should keep working??? I'm so confused about all this!!! My first 10 years I only made like $15k-$20k per year but now I make about $75k. Should I work longer to improve my SS???
0 coins
Mia Green
One clarification on the 35 years: it's not just any 35 years - the SSA indexes your earnings for inflation and then takes the highest 35 years. So your $20,000 salary from 1990 might count as $45,000+ in today's dollars when they do the calculation. This is why it sometimes makes sense to work longer even past 35 years - if your current earnings are significantly higher than your early career earnings (even after indexing), you can replace lower-earning years with higher-earning years and increase your benefit amount.
0 coins
James Johnson
•Thank you for explaining this. Is there a way to see which of my years are counting as my highest 35 after indexing? I'm wondering if working a few more years would replace some of my lower-earning years rather than just filling in zeros.
0 coins