From Roll Call:
Key lawmakers are eyeing a possible year-end tax package as their best shot at offering a fix for a Social Security provision that many on Capitol Hill believe unfairly cuts benefits for public employees who also have government pensions.
The issue was thrust into the spotlight after bipartisan supporters of legislation to permanently boost Social Security payouts by hundreds of dollars a month for nearly 3 million individuals were on the cusp of forcing their bill to the House floor using a special procedural tool.
But House Ways and Means Committee leaders who have been working on their own less expansive compromise plan, one they believe has a better chance of becoming law, turned off the procedural gambit by instead marking the bill up on Sept. 20.
The House’s top tax writers believe they’re close to agreement on addressing the “windfall elimination provision,” which lowers Social Security payouts for individuals who qualify for pensions from their work as teachers, police officers, government employees and other public sector jobs and for Social Security benefits from separate employment. ...
14 comments:
It’s very interesting that so many are in favor of a change to SSA to benefit these individuals who clearly could work and have multiple sources of income, but no one is introducing legislation to change the SSI program to get those individuals more money.
So one group gets multiple pension, the other gets $30 towards high speed internet.
Cool
We need to fix Social Security's impending shortfall, not make the program more beneficial to people with multiple pensions.
My gripe with current legislation is that I have been forced to pay into two gov pension schemes only to have $512.00 of my due pension deducted.
That is 25% of my future income gone.
To some $512.00 is a small proportion, so crazy I might be but I think I get a crappy deal.
I don’t think you understand Social Security works. Most people, unless you die relatively young, draw out way more than they ever paid in individually (even under WEP).
It’s definitely not a bad deal. It’s a Social Insurance Program not and Individual Retirement Account.
Then do what the UK did, let me put the money my second pension took and put it in an IRA.
i would be happy with that.
Life expectancy is 76 for an average American guy.
A ten year Annuity would pay me way more than $460.00 a month.
Or ever better, transfer it into the regular SS and give me a SS pension based on that.
I agree that SS will 99% of the time pay out way more than a IRA, but WEP takes about half of mine and reduces the income for my disabled son and my wife's survival pension if I die.
The majority of people effected by WEP are Teachers, Police or Firefighters.
The sort of people the gov should reward not penalize.
You want to fix the shortfall by reducing the amount paid out. I would like to see it fixed by raising the cut off point for paying into it.
Dear Anonymous.
The SS shortfall will have to fixed, i agree.
But reducing SS pensions for Teachers, Police and Firefighters seems a tad unfair to me.
Raising the cut off limit for contributions seems like a better idea to me.
WEP doesn't apply after death. It only applies to the worker while receiving a non covered pension and SSA.
HR-22 also addresses the fact that paying into two SS systems reduces your GPO, this is what survivals benefits and disabled child benefits are tied to.
@1141 Double dipping is double dipping whether it's police or any other government bureaucrat.
@225 GPO doesn't apply to DAC benefits. WEP would if the wage earner is alive.
It is double dipping but the helpings are, in most cases smaller.
Yes! it is possible to come out on top with two gov pension schemes. I will admit to that.
The problem is that WEP is unfairly weighted to penalize lower wage earners. Reductions are capped at $512.00
I will concede that a proportional system would level things out.
However, elimination is problibly easier and more cost effective than evoking a proportional revision because that would mean a change to the actual SS system.
Double dipping yes, but in most cases the portions are smaller.
Had i paid my deductions into just one SS system, i would be better off to the tune of $300.00 a month.
Eliminating WEP will i admit give me slightly more income than if i had paid into just one system. This is because if you pay into regular SS for more than 10 years but less than 20 you will still get 20 years worth.
In my case that means an extra $80 a month.
Perhaps a proportional revision make it fair for everyone, but realistically the chances of repeal are higher than a proportional uncapped correction.
Repeal has support of unions and politicians because it makes them look good.
There's a limit to how much ones benefit can be reduced due to WEP. SSA can't be reduced by more than one half of the pension attributable to non covered work.
So if a small pension of $300 per month, guarantee won't reduce it more than $150.
I'd like to see WEP and GPO eliminated solely to get rid of a pain in the ass workload. Eliminate Workers Comp offset next. Quit whining about fairness; the amounts involved are essentially a rounding error.
WEP usually doesn't change once imposed and GPO frequently doesn't either. Hardly pains to administer.
Worker's Comp is a fairness issue. No offset could mean people receiving much more than they did working. Dept of Labor payments are a pain but you'd like to pay full SSA plus $3000 per month for many years?
Post a Comment