Social Security spousal benefits with insufficient work credits - does new bill affect government workers?
I need advice about spousal benefits for my husband who has work history with local government. I'm turning 70 this December and planning to file for my Social Security retirement benefits. My husband is 68 but only has 29 work credits under Social Security (he's 11 quarters short) because he switched to municipal employment for most of his career where they had their own pension system. I've been reading about some new legislation Biden signed (or is planning to sign?) that might affect government workers and Social Security. Does this new bill change anything for our situation? Specifically: 1. Can my husband get any spousal benefits based on my record given his insufficient quarters? 2. If he can't get benefits now, would he qualify when I start collecting? 3. If I die before him, would he be eligible for survivor benefits even with his limited credits? 4. Does the Government Pension Offset (GPO) completely eliminate any chance of him receiving benefits through me? Really confused about how all these rules interact with the new legislation. Thanks for any help!
14 comments
Join the conversation
Harold Oh
The legislation you're referring to is likely the Social Security Fairness Act, which proposes to repeal the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and Government Pension Offset (GPO). It has NOT been signed into law yet - it's still being debated. As things stand today with current law, here are the answers to your questions: 1. Yes, your husband can qualify for spousal benefits based on your record EVEN WITH insufficient quarters on his own. Spousal benefits don't require the spouse to have their own work credits. 2. He can only apply for spousal benefits once you've filed for your own retirement benefits. 3. Yes, he would qualify for survivor benefits if you predecease him, regardless of his own work credits. HOWEVER - and this is a big one - if your husband receives a pension from that government employment where he didn't pay into Social Security, the Government Pension Offset will reduce his spousal/survivor benefits by 2/3 of his government pension amount. In many cases, this eliminates the spousal benefit completely.
0 coins
Payton Black
•Thank you for clarifying! I was confused about which bill I was hearing about. So if I understand correctly, with the CURRENT rules, he could get spousal benefits when I file, but they'd be reduced by 2/3 of his municipal pension? Do you know if there's any calculator or way to estimate how much he might actually receive after the GPO reduction? His pension is about $2,750/month.
0 coins
Amun-Ra Azra
To add to what the previous commenter said, I've been through this exact situation with my wife. The GPO (Government Pension Offset) calculation works like this: 1. Take your husband's monthly government pension: $2,750 2. Calculate 2/3 of that amount: $2,750 × 2/3 = $1,833 3. This amount ($1,833) gets subtracted from any spousal or survivor benefits So if your full retirement benefit is $3,000 and your husband would normally be eligible for a 50% spousal benefit ($1,500), after the GPO reduction it would be: $1,500 - $1,833 = $0 (can't go below zero) Similarly for survivor benefits - if he would normally receive 100% of your benefit as a survivor ($3,000), after GPO it would be: $3,000 - $1,833 = $1,167 GPO impacts a lot of public servants. The Social Security Fairness Act would eliminate this reduction, but it's been introduced many times over the years without passing.
0 coins
Summer Green
•this is so unfair my sister worked for the school district for 30 years and gets ZERO SS benefits even though her husband paid in his whole life!! they take it all away with that stupid GPO rule
0 coins
Gael Robinson
Social Security is so confusing with all these weird rules! I thought everyone gets spousal benefits if their husband/wife worked enough. Never heard of this GPO thing before. Does it only affect government workers?
0 coins
Harold Oh
•Yes, GPO only affects people who receive pensions from employment not covered by Social Security (mainly certain state/local government positions and some federal positions). The reasoning behind GPO is that these pensions essentially replace Social Security, so the government doesn't want to pay "double benefits." It's important to note that GPO only applies to government pensions from work where Social Security taxes weren't paid. Private company pensions don't trigger GPO reductions.
0 coins
Edward McBride
I actually just dealt with this last month. Been calling the SSA for WEEKS trying to get this sorted out for my spouse who also worked for county government. IMPOSSIBLE to get through to anyone!!!!! Every time I called I waited 2+ hours and then got disconnected or told to call back later. SO FRUSTRATING!!!!
0 coins
Darcy Moore
•I had the same problem trying to get information about my GPO situation. After weeks of frustration, I found a service called Claimyr that got me through to a Social Security representative in under 20 minutes. It was such a relief after all those disconnected calls and hours on hold. You can see how it works at https://youtu.be/Z-BRbJw3puU and their website is claimyr.com. They connect you directly to SSA and stay on the line until a real person answers. Was worth it to finally get my GPO questions answered with my specific pension amount.
0 coins
Dana Doyle
Does anyone know if they count military service for the 40 quarters? My husband also has some military time before his county job.
0 coins
Amun-Ra Azra
•Yes, military service after 1956 is covered employment for Social Security purposes, so it would count toward the 40 quarters needed for benefits. Your husband should make sure his military service is properly credited in his Social Security record - sometimes there are gaps in reporting. He can check his earnings record on the mySocialSecurity website or request that SSA verify his military service credits.
0 coins
Payton Black
Thanks everyone for the helpful information! I talked with my husband about all this, and we're going to look up his exact pension amount and do that GPO calculation to see what we're dealing with. Sounds like if the Social Security Fairness Act ever passes, we'd be in much better shape, but we shouldn't count on that happening anytime soon. I guess I'll go ahead and file for my benefits when I turn 70 in December, and then we can apply for his spousal benefits after that. At least the survivor benefits might help him somewhat if I pass away first, even with the GPO reduction.
0 coins
Harold Oh
•That sounds like a good plan. One more thing - make sure your husband requests a Social Security Statement (Form SSA-7004) to verify his exact number of credits. Sometimes there are earnings that weren't properly recorded, especially from long ago. It's possible he might be closer to 40 quarters than you think if there were any reporting errors. And yes, filing at 70 maximizes your benefit, which is especially important since it also maximizes any potential survivor benefits for your husband later.
0 coins
Edward McBride
I heard you need 10 years of work to get ANY SS benefits at all, so if he's only got 29 quarters (about 7 years) doesn't that mean he's completely out of luck for his OWN benefit regardless of this GPO stuff? That's what happened to my aunt.
0 coins
Amun-Ra Azra
•You're correct. To qualify for retirement benefits based on your own work record, you need 40 quarters (10 years) of covered employment. With 29 quarters, the original poster's husband doesn't qualify for his own retirement benefit. However, the 40-quarter requirement doesn't apply to spousal or survivor benefits. You can receive those regardless of your own work history, though as we've discussed, the GPO will reduce them if you receive a non-covered government pension.
0 coins