This recording presents the viewpoints of the AMAC Foundation’s Social Security Advisory Staff, trained and accredited under the National Social Security Advisors program of the National Social Security Association, LLC (NSSA). NSSA and the AMAC Foundation are not affiliated with or endorsed by the United States Government, the Social Security Administration, or any other state government. To request additional information, contact our Advisory Staff at 888-750-2622, or email us at SSAdvisor@AmacFoundation.org.
Wow, you just regurgitated the govts song and dance without making a judgement yourself. How many unfair things has the govt did that “withstood time and court challenges?” 2.5 million folks effected and many of your own members and You can not see any unfairness in this law? So a spouse can not get 1/2 of a spousal benefit if they taught children in public school but a Bill Gates wife who never worked a day in her life can get 1/2 of Bills Soc Sec? No comment or judgement or backing… Sounds like AARP to me…
David:
Thank you for your comments and for taking the time to offer your opinion regarding the content of our post on WEP and GPO. The AMAC Foundation Social Security Advisory Staff, in response to comments and concerns expressed by many who have questioned the purpose of these two Social Security provisions, has conducted extensive research into their design and legislative intent. Much of this research was associated with challenges to the provisions’ perceived fairness and the popular perception that their impact on those affected is overly punitive. There have been many calls for complete elimination of both WEP and GPO over the past decade, and many congressional bills have been introduced to achieve their elimination. None of the legislation has passed.
As a result of our research, the AMAC Foundation concludes that the purpose of the WEP provision is consistent with the objective of ensuring that only lower-earning workers realize the benefit inherent in the formula’s progressive design. For WEP, the income replacement rate built into the first tier of the primary insurance amount calculation is intended to apply to only those whose predominant career earnings were the result of covered Social Security employment. To dismiss earnings from noncovered employment when calculating the benefit would cause the beneficiary’s earnings to appear artificially low, thus creating an unfair advantage. It’s worth noting that WEP has built into it an avenue that can mitigate the impact on those affected, basically through the affected person achieving additional covered earnings on a scaled basis.
For GPO, we concluded that the provision better equalizes benefits for all spouses and survivors, particularly since the reduction to Social Security spousal and survivor benefits under the GPO is less than it is under the normal dual entitlement rule. The GPO reduction to the spouse or survivor benefit is less than the reduction imposed by the standard dual entitlement rule affecting all other recipients.
As mentioned earlier, our staff has carefully examined the intent of these provisions as originally implemented in 1983 and conclude that their purpose is consistent with the benefit formula’s progressive design. We are well aware of the sentiments of those affected by the legislation and, while we recognize these sentiments, we can only point to the reason why they exist in the first place–the concept of social insurance for low wage earners that is built into Social Security’s basic design and that governs many of the program’s rules. Our analysis of the perceived unfairness of these provisions is based on the technical structure of the rules as they exist.
Again, thank you for your comments, and we will keep them of file for future review as WEP and GPO repeal legislation develops.
Gerry Hafer, AMAC Foundation
888-750-2622
http://www.AmacFoundation.org
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this message, including any attachments, are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the person or entity to whom the message was addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please be advised that any dissemination, distribution, forwarding, printing, copying, or use of the contents of this message, and any attached documentation, is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender. Please also permanently delete all copies of the original message and any attached documentation. The opinions and interpretations expressed in this message are the viewpoints of the message’s author, a trained advisor accredited under the National Social Security Advisors program of the National Social Security Association, LLC (NSSA). The author, the NSSA, and the AMAC Foundation are not affiliated with or endorsed by the United States Government, the Social Security Administration, or any other state government.