Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for
Spouses and Survivors
Alison M. Shelton
Analyst in Income Security
Dawn Nuschler
Specialist in Income Security
November 5, 2010
The House Ways and Means Committee is making available this version of this Congressional Research Service
(CRS) report, with the cover date shown above, for inclusion in its 2011 Green Book website. CRS works
exclusively for the United States Congress, providing policy and legal analysis to Committees and Members of
both the House and Senate, regardless of party affiliation.
Congressional Research Service
R41479
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Summary
Social Security auxiliary benefits were established in 1939 when Congress extended benefits to
the dependents and survivors of workers covered by Social Security. Since 1939, Social Security
auxiliary benefits have been modified by Congress numerous times to change eligibility
requirements for spouses, widows, children, and others and to expand eligibility for auxiliary
benefits to new groups of beneficiaries, such as divorcé(e)s, husbands, and widowers.
Auxiliary benefits are paid to the spouse, former spouse, survivor, child, or parent of a Social
Security-covered worker and are equal to a specified percentage of the worker’s basic monthly
benefit amount (subject to a maximum family benefit amount). For example, the spouse of a
retired worker may receive up to 50% of the retired worker’s basic benefit and the widow(er) of a
retired worker may receive up to 100% of the retired worker’s basic benefit.
When auxiliary benefits were first established, most households consisted of a single earner—
usually the husband—and a wife who cared for children and remained out of the paid workforce.
As a result, benefits for non-working spouses were structured to be relatively generous. A woman
who was never employed but is married to a man with high Social Security-covered wages may
receive a Social Security spousal benefit that is higher than the retirement benefit received by a
single woman, or a woman who was married less than 10 years, who worked a full career in a
low-wage job.
In recent decades, this household structure has changed in part because women have entered the
workforce in increasing numbers. The labor force participation rate of women with children under
the age of 18 increased from 47% in 1975 to 71% in 2008. As a result, many women now qualify
for Social Security benefits based on their own work records. In some cases, under the current
benefit structure, a two-earner household may receive lower total Social Security benefits than a
single-earner household with identical total Social Security-covered earnings. Women are,
however, more likely than men to take breaks in employment to care for family members, which
can result in fewer years of contributions to Social Security and employer-sponsored pension
plans.
Another change since 1939 has been an increase in the number of men and women who remain
single or who have divorced. Persons who have never married, or who were married for less than
10 years, do not qualify for Social Security spousal or survivor benefits under current law.
Proposals to modify the Social Security auxiliary benefit structure are generally motivated by
desire to improve equity for families, or adequacy for certain beneficiaries, rather than by the
financial status of the Social Security system. For example, some proposals address the adequacy
of benefits for certain groups of beneficiaries such as elderly and widowed women. Although
Social Security plays an important role in the retirement security of aged women, about 17% of
divorced Social Security beneficiaries and 23% of never-married female Social Security
beneficiaries have total incomes below the official poverty line.
This report describes the current-law structure of auxiliary benefits for spouses, divorced spouses
and surviving spouses. It also discusses some of the issues concerning the adequacy and equity of
the current-law structure of auxiliary benefits, and presents some recent proposals.
Congressional Research Service
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
Origins of Social Security Auxiliary Benefits .............................................................................. 3
Auxiliary Benefits Eligibility and Determination......................................................................... 4
Auxiliary Benefits are Based on a Primary Earner’s Benefits................................................. 4
Currently Married or Separated Spouses of Retired or Disabled Workers ............................... 4
Widows and Widowers’ Survivor Benefits............................................................................. 5
Mother’s and Father’s Benefits.............................................................................................. 5
Divorcé(e)s’ Spousal and Survivor Benefits........................................................................... 6
Data on Duration of Marriages ........................................................................................ 6
Dually Entitled Beneficiaries................................................................................................. 7
Labor Force Participation of Women ........................................................................................... 9
Labor Force Participation of Women with Children ............................................................... 9
Earnings Gap ...................................................................................................................... 11
Adequacy and Equity Issues...................................................................................................... 13
Adequacy Issues ................................................................................................................. 13
Equity Issues....................................................................................................................... 15
Other Considerations........................................................................................................... 17
Proposals for Restructuring Social Security Auxiliary Benefits.................................................. 18
Earnings Sharing................................................................................................................. 18
Divorcé(e) Benefits ............................................................................................................. 20
Increase Benefits for the Oldest Old .................................................................................... 21
Minimum Benefit for Low Earners...................................................................................... 22
Caregiver Credits and Drop-out Years for Caregiving .......................................................... 24
Survivor’s Benefit Increased to 75% of Couple’s Combined Benefit.................................... 25
Conclusion................................................................................................................................ 27
Figures
Figure 1. Basis of Entitlement for Women Aged 62 or Older, 1960-2008, Selected Years ............ 8
Figure 2. Labor Force Participation Rate of Women with Children, 1975 to 2008 ...................... 10
Figure 3. Relative Importance of Social Security to Total Retirement Income for Persons
Aged 65 or Older in 2006....................................................................................................... 13
Figure 4. Poverty Status of Social Security Beneficiaries Aged 65 or Older in 2006 by
Gender and Marital Status ...................................................................................................... 14
Tables
Table 1. Percentage Reaching 10th Marriage Anniversary, by Marriage Cohort and Sex,
for First and Second Marriages................................................................................................. 7
Table 2. Average Benefit Levels Among Retired Workers With Dual Entitlement,
December 2009........................................................................................................................ 9
Congressional Research Service
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Table 3. Women’s Earnings as a Percent of Men’s Earnings, 1979 and 2009 .............................. 12
Table 4. Benefits for Three Couples with Different Earnings Splits
Between Husband and Wife ................................................................................................... 16
Table B-1. Computation of a Worker’s Primary Insurance Amount (PIA) in 2010 Based
on an Illustrative AIME of $5,000 .......................................................................................... 30
Table C-1. Social Security Spousal and Widow(er)’s Benefits.................................................... 35
Appendixes
Appendix A. Major Changes in Social Security Auxiliary Benefits ............................................ 29
Appendix B. Computation of the Social Security Retired-Worker Benefit.................................. 30
Appendix C. Summary of Social Security Spousal and Widow(er)’s Benefits Under
Current Law........................................................................................................................... 33
Congressional Research Service
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Introduction
Social Security provides benefits, sometimes called “auxiliary benefits” or “dependents’
benefits,” to the spouses, former spouses, widow(er)s, children, and parents of retired, disabled,
and deceased workers. Auxiliary benefits are based on the work record of the household’s
primary earner.
Social Security spousal benefits (i.e., benefits for a wife or husband of the primary earner) are
payable to the spouse or divorced spouse of a retired or disabled worker. Social Security survivor
benefits are payable to the survivors of a deceased worker as a widow(er), as a child, as a mother
or father of the deceased worker’s child(ren), or as a parent of the deceased worker. Although
Social Security is often viewed as a program that primarily provides benefits to retired and
disabled workers, 39% of new benefit awards in 2008 were made to the dependents and survivors
of retired, disabled, and deceased workers.1
Spousal and survivor benefits play an important role in ensuring women’s retirement security.
About 20.7 million women aged 65 and older receive Social Security benefits, including 8.9
million women who receive retired-worker benefits, 2.5 million women who are entitled solely as
the spouse of a retired worker, 3.6 million women who are dually entitled as the survivor of a
deceased worker, and 6.1 million women who are dually entitled to a retired-worker benefit and a
spouse or survivor benefit (for more information on dually entitled beneficiaries, see “Dually
Entitled Beneficiaries” below).2 For almost 60% of elderly women in beneficiary families, Social
Security provided 50% or more of family income in 2008. For about 29% of elderly women in
beneficiary families, Social Security provided 90% or more of family income in 2008.3
Women, however, continue to be vulnerable to poverty in old age for several reasons.
• Women are more likely to take employment breaks to care for children or
parents. During 2008, 91% of men and 76% of women aged 25-54 participated in
the labor force.4 Breaks in employment result in fewer years of contributions to
Social Security and employer-sponsored pension plans.
• The median earnings of women who are full-time wage and salary workers is
80% of their male counterparts.5 Because Social Security and pension benefits
1 Social Security Administration, Fast Facts & Figures About Social Security, 2009, Washington, DC, July 2009, p.
12, http://www.socialsecurity.gov/policy.
2 Social Security Administration, 2010 Annual Statistical Supplement (Washington, DC 2010), table 5.A15.
3 Social Security Administration, Income of the Aged Chartbook (Washington, DC 2008), p. 25.
4 CRS Report RL30122, Pension Sponsorship and Participation: Summary of Recent Trends, by John J. Topoleski,
Table 1. Among workers between the ages of 25 and 64 who were employed in the private sector full-time and year-
round in 2008, women were slightly more likely than men (60.1% of women compared to 58.3% of men) to work for a
firm that sponsored a retirement plan, and about equally as likely as men to participate in the employer-sponsored
pension plan (about 51% of both genders participated in the employer-sponsored retirement plan).
5 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Highlights of Women’s Earnings in 2009, Washington, DC,
June 2010, http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswom2009.pdf. If the population were ranked from lowest to highest based on
earnings level, the earnings level at the middle of the distribution would be the median value. At most half of the
population would have earnings less than the median value, and at most half of the population would have earnings
greater than the median value.
Congressional Research Service
1
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
are linked to earnings, this “earnings gap” can lead to lower benefit amounts for
women than for men.
• Women on average live longer than men. Women reaching the age of 65 in 2008
are likely to live another 19.3 years, on average, compared with another 16.9
years for men.6 As a consequence, women spend longer in retirement and are
more vulnerable to inflation and the risk of outliving other assets. The real value
of pension benefits declines with age as pensions generally are not adjusted for
inflation, and some pensions cease with the death of the retired worker.
• About 8% of women aged 50-59, and about 4% of women aged 60-69, have
never married and therefore do not qualify for Social Security spousal or survivor
benefits.7
• About 6% of women aged 50-59, about 18% of women aged 60-69, and about
52% of women aged 70 and older are currently widowed. By comparison, about
1% of men aged 50-59, about 4% of men aged 60-69, and about 19% of men
aged 70 and older are widowed.8
Spousal and survivor benefits were added to the Social Security system in 1939. At that time, the
majority of households consisted of a single earner—generally the husband—and a wife who was
not in the paid workforce but instead stayed home to care for children. In recent decades, women
have increasingly assumed roles as equal or primary wage earners or as heads of families.
Another development over recent decades has been that increasing numbers of men and women
remain single or are divorced. Social Security spousal and aged survivor benefits are not available
to persons who have never married. Some argue that the unavailability of spousal and survivor
benefits for women who have never been married, or who were married for less than 10 years,
may be particularly problematic for minority and poor women.9
The current benefit structure can result in situations where a two-earner household receives lower
combined Social Security benefits than a single-earner household with identical total Social
Security-covered earnings. Moreover, after the death of one spouse, the disparity in benefits may
increase: in a one-earner couple, the surviving spouse receives two-thirds of what the couple
received on a combined basis, while in some two-earner couples with roughly equal earnings, the
surviving spouse receives roughly one-half of what the couple received on a combined basis.
This report presents the current-law structure of auxiliary benefits for spouses, divorced spouses,
and surviving spouses. It discusses some issues concerning the adequacy and equity of current-
law spousal and widow(er)’s benefits, as well as some of the proposed changes.
6 Social Security Administration, The 2009 Annual Report of the Board of Trustees of the Federal Old-Age and
Survivors Insurance and Federal Disability Insurance Trust Funds, Washington, DC, 2009, Table V.A3,
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/2009/lr5a3.html.
7 U.S. Census Bureau, Number, Timing and Duration of Marriages and Divorces: 2004 , Washington, DC, 2007,
Table 3, http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/marr-div/2004detailed_tables.html.
8 Ibid.
9 Madonna Harrington Meyer, Douglas A. Wolf, and Christine L. Himes, Linking Benefits to Marital Status: Race and
Diminishing Access to Social Security Spouse and Widow Benefits in the U.S., Center for Retirement Research, Boston
College, CRR WP 2004-5, Boston, MA, March 2004. See also Christopher R. Tamborini, Howard Iams, and Kevin
Whitman, “Marital History, Race and Social Security: Spouse and Widow Benefit Eligibility in the United States,”
Research on Aging, vol. 31, no. 5 (2009), pp. 577-605.
Congressional Research Service
2
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Origins of Social Security Auxiliary Benefits
The original Social Security Act of 193510 established a system of Old-Age Insurance to provide
benefits to individuals who were aged 65 or older and who had “earned” retirement benefits
through work in jobs covered by the system. Before the Old-Age Insurance program was in full
operation, the Social Security Amendments of 193911 extended monthly benefits to workers’
dependents and survivors. The program now provided Old-Age and Survivors Insurance
(OASI).12
The 1939 amendments established benefits for the following dependents and survivors: (1) a wife
aged 65 or older; (2) a child under the age of 18; (3) a widowed mother of any age caring for an
eligible child; (4) a widow aged 65 or older; and (5) a surviving dependent parent aged 65 or
older.
The 1938 Social Security Advisory Council, in its report to the Social Security Board and the
Senate Finance Committee, justified creating spousal benefits on the grounds of the adequacy of
household benefits:
The inadequacy of the benefits payable during the early years of the old-age insurance
program is more marked where the benefits must support not only the annuitant himself but
also his wife. In 1930, 63.8 per cent of men aged 65 and over were married. Payment of
supplementary allowances to annuitants who have wives over 65 will increase the average
benefit in such a manner as to meet the greatest social need with the minimum increase in
cost. The Council believes that an additional 50 percent of the basic annuity would constitute
a reasonable provision for the support of the annuitant’s wife.13
The Social Security Board concurred in its own report, which it wrote based on the Council’s
report. The Board also found that benefit adequacy was the primary justification for spousal
benefits:
The Board suggests that a supplementary benefit be paid for the aged dependent wife of the
retired worker which would be related to his old-age benefit. Such a plan would take account
of greater presumptive need of the married couple without requiring investigation of
individual need.14
Since 1939, auxiliary benefits have been modified by Congress many times, including the
expansion of benefits to husbands, widowers, and divorced spouses. The legislative history of
auxiliary benefits is outlined in detail in Appendix A.
10 P.L. 271, 74th Congress.
11 P.L. 379, 76th Congress.
12 Congress later established the Disability Insurance (DI) program in 1956.
13 Social Security Administration, Report of the 1938 Advisory Council on Social Security,
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/reports/38advise.html.
14 Social Security Board, A Report to the President and to the Congress of the United States, Washington, DC,
December 30, 1938, http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/reports/38ssbadvise.html.
Congressional Research Service
3
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Auxiliary Benefits Eligibility and Determination
Auxiliary Benefits are Based on a Primary Earner’s Benefits
Auxiliary benefits for a spouse, survivor, or other dependent are based on the benefit amount
received by a primary earner (an insured worker). The primary earner may receive a Social
Security retirement or disability benefit. Social Security retirement benefits are based on the
average of a worker’s highest 35 years of earnings. A worker’s basic monthly benefit amount
(primary insurance amount or PIA) is computed by applying the Social Security benefit formula
to the worker’s career-average, wage-indexed earnings. The benefit formula replaces a higher
percentage of the pre-retirement earnings of workers with low career-average earnings than for
workers with high career-average earnings.
The primary earner’s initial monthly benefit is equal to his or her PIA if benefits are claimed at or
after full retirement age (FRA, currently rising from age 65 to age 67). A worker’s initial monthly
benefit will be less than his or her PIA if the worker begins receiving benefits before FRA, and it
will be greater than his or her PIA if the worker begins receiving benefits after FRA. The purpose
of the actuarial adjustment to benefits claimed before or after FRA is to ensure that the worker
receives roughly the same total lifetime benefits regardless of when he or she claims benefits
(assuming he or she lives to average life expectancy). For a detailed explanation of the Social
Security retired worker benefit computation, the actuarial adjustment to benefits claimed before
or after FRA and other benefit adjustments that may apply, see Appendix B.
Auxiliary benefits are paid to the spouse, former spouse, survivor, child, or parent of the primary
earner.15 Auxiliary benefits are determined as a percentage of the primary earner’s PIA, subject to
a maximum family benefit amount. For example, the spouse of a retired or disabled worker may
receive up to 50% of the worker’s PIA, and the widow(er) of a deceased worker may receive up
to 100% of the worker’s PIA. As with benefits paid to the primary earner, auxiliary benefits are
subject to adjustments based on age at entitlement and other factors. A basic description of
auxiliary benefits is provided in the following sections, with more detailed information provided
in Appendix C.
Currently Married or Separated Spouses of Retired or Disabled
Workers
Social Security provides a spousal benefit that is equal to 50% of a retired or disabled worker’s
PIA.16 A qualifying spouse must be at least 62 years old or have a qualifying child (a child who is
under the age of 16 or who receives Social Security disability benefits) in his or her care. A
qualifying spouse may be either married to or separated from the worker. An individual must have
been married to the worker for at least one year before he or she applies for spousal benefits, with
15 Benefits for the dependent children and parents of an insured worker are not discussed in this report.
16 As noted above, a retired worker’s own monthly benefit may be higher or lower than his or her PIA. A disabled
worker’s benefit is equal to his or her PIA.
Congressional Research Service
4
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
certain exceptions. In addition, the worker must be entitled to (generally, collecting) benefits for
an eligible spouse to become entitled to benefits.17
If a spouse claims benefits before FRA, his or her benefits are reduced to take into account the
longer expected period of benefit receipt. An individual who is entitled to a Social Security
benefit based on his or her own work record and to a spousal benefit in effect receives the higher
of the two benefits (see “Dually Entitled Beneficiaries” below).
Widows and Widowers’ Survivor Benefits
Under current law, surviving spouses (including divorced surviving spouses) may be eligible for
aged widow(er)’s benefits beginning at the age of 60. If the surviving spouse receives Social
Security disability benefits and meets certain other conditions, survivor benefits are available
beginning at the age of 50. The aged widow(er)’s basic benefit is equal to 100% of the deceased
worker’s PIA.
A qualifying widow(er) must have been married to the deceased worker for at least nine months18
and must not have remarried before the age of 60 (or before age 50 if disabled). Widow(er)s who
remarry after the age of 60 (or after age 50 if disabled) may become entitled to benefits based on
the prior deceased spouse’s work record. (Widow(er)s who are caring for children under the age
of 16 or disabled may receive survivor benefits at any age and do not have to meet the length of
marriage requirement—see “Mother’s and Father’s Benefits” below.) Survivor benefits are not
available to unmarried women, although they may be available to the natural mother or father of a
deceased worker’s biological child.
If an aged widow(er) claims survivor benefits before FRA, his or her monthly benefit is reduced
(up to a maximum of 28.5%) to take into account the longer expected period of benefit receipt. In
addition, survivor benefits may be affected by the deceased worker’s decision to claim benefits
before FRA under the widow(er)’s limit provision (see Appendix C). As with spouses of retired
or disabled workers, a surviving spouse who is entitled to a Social Security benefit based on his
or her own work record and a widow(er)’s benefit receives in effect the higher of the two benefits
(see “Dually Entitled Beneficiaries” below).
Mother’s and Father’s Benefits
Social Security provides benefits to a surviving spouse or divorced surviving spouse of any age
who is caring for the deceased worker’s child, when that child is either under the age of 16 or
disabled. Mother’s and father’s benefits are equal to 75% of the deceased worker’s PIA, subject
to a maximum family benefit. There are no length of marriage requirements for mother’s and
father’s benefits, whether the beneficiary was married to, separated from or divorced from the
deceased worker; however, remarriage generally ends entitlement to mother’s and father’s
benefits.
17 As discussed below, different rules may apply in the case of a divorced spouse.
18 Exceptions are provided in some cases such as accidental death or death in the line of duty.
Congressional Research Service
5
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Divorcé(e)s’ Spousal and Survivor Benefits
Spousal benefits are available to a divorced spouse beginning at the age of 62, if the marriage
lasted at least 10 years before the divorce became final and the person claiming spousal benefits
is currently unmarried.19 A divorced spouse who is younger than 62 years old is not eligible for
spousal benefits even with an entitled child in his or her care. Survivor benefits are available to a
divorced surviving spouse beginning at the age of 60 (or beginning at age 50 if disabled) if the
divorced surviving spouse has not remarried before the age of 60 (or before age 50 if disabled), or
if the surviving divorced spouse has an entitled child in his or her care.
Divorced spouses who are entitled to benefits receive the same spousal and survivor benefits as
married or separated persons. If a divorced spouse claims benefits before FRA, his or her benefits
are reduced to take into account the longer expected period of benefit receipt. In addition, a
divorced spouse who is entitled to a Social Security benefit based on his or her own work record
and a spousal or survivor benefit receives in effect the higher of the two benefits (see “Dually
Entitled Beneficiaries” below).
Data on Duration of Marriages
A divorced person who was married to a primary earner for less than 10 years does not qualify for
spousal benefits on that spouse’s record (although he or she may qualify for benefits based on his
or her own record or on another spouse’s record).20 First marriages that end in divorce last about
eight years, on average.21 Table 1 shows that first marriages occurring from 1955 to 1959 lasted
longer than those occurring in subsequent decades. About 87% of women who married for the
first time during the late 1950s stayed married for 10 years or longer; however, since the late
1970s, only about 70% of women’s first marriages have lasted for at least 10 years (with the
exception of a slight increase in marriage duration rates during the late 1980s). According to the
same source, about 24% of women aged 45 in 2004 had been married two or more times.22
19 As noted previously, generally the worker must have claimed benefits for an eligible spouse to become entitled to
benefits. An eligible divorced spouse, however, may become independently entitled to benefits if the worker is eligible
for (but has not yet claimed) benefits and the couple has been divorced for at least 2 years. (Social Security
Administration, Program Operations Manual System (POMS), Section RS 00202.001 (Spouse),
http://policy.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/links/0300202001) If a person has more than one former spouse, he or she is entitled to a
spousal benefit based on the earnings record of the highest-earning spouse.
20 As noted above, a divorced surviving spouse may qualify for mother’s or father’s benefits regardless of the length of
marriage to the primary earner.
21 U.S. Census Bureau, Number, Timing, and Duration of Marriages and Divorces: 2004, Washington, DC, February
2005, Table 6, http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/marr-div/2004detailed_tables.html.
22 U.S. Census Bureau, Number, Timing and Duration of Marriages and Divorces: 2004, Washington, DC, Tables 1, 2
and 6, http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/marr-div/2004detailed_tables.html.
Congressional Research Service
6
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Table 1. Percentage Reaching 10th Marriage Anniversary, by Marriage Cohort and
Sex, for First and Second Marriages
First Marriages
Second Marriages
Year of Marriage
Male Female Male Female
1955-1959 88.3%
86.8% X
X
1960-1964 85.0 82.3
X
X
1965-1969 76.9 74.9
X
X
1970-1974 74.4 71.6
X
X
1975-1979 73.0 70.0 74.9%
72.1%
1980-1984 73.7 70.7 75.0 71.6
1985-1989 76.4 73.0 70.3 66.8
1990-1994 70.0 69.2 68.0 64.3
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Number, Timing and Duration of Marriages and Divorces: 2004, Washington, DC,
Table 2, http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/marr-div/2004detailed_tables.html.
Other data suggest that, for men and women aged 15 to 44 in 2002, the probability of a first
marriage lasting 10 years or longer was 65%. The remaining one-third of first marriages ended in
divorce or separation before reaching the 10th anniversary. The probability that a first marriage
would remain intact for at least 10 years was 68%, 51%, and 64% for Hispanic, Black, and White
women, respectively. Among women aged 40 to 44 in 2002, 27% had been married two or more
times.23
Dually Entitled Beneficiaries
A person may qualify for a spousal or survivor benefit as well as for a Social Security benefit
based on his or her own work record (a retired-worker benefit). In such cases, the person in effect
receives the higher of the worker benefit and the spousal/survivor benefit. When the person’s
retired-worker benefit is higher than the spousal/survivor benefit to which he or she would be
entitled, the person receives only the retired-worker benefit. Conversely, when the person’s
retired-worker benefit is lower than the spousal/survivor benefit, the person is referred to as
“dually entitled” and receives the retired-worker benefit plus a spousal/survivor benefit that is
equal to the difference between the retired-worker benefit and the full spousal/survivor benefit. In
essence, the person receives a total benefit amount equal to the higher spousal benefit.
Women have increasingly become entitled to Social Security benefits based on their own work
records, either as retired-worker beneficiaries only or as dually entitled beneficiaries. As shown in
Figure 1, the percentage of women aged 62 or older entitled to benefits based on their own work
records—as retired workers or as dually-entitled beneficiaries—grew from 43% in 1960 to 73%
in 2009. Most of this growth was in the percentage of dually-entitled beneficiaries, however. The
percentage of women aged 62 or older entitled to benefits based solely on their own work records
23 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for
Health Statistics, Marriage and Cohabitation in the United States: A Statistical Portrait Based on Cycle 6 (2002) of the
National Survey of Family Growth, Series 23, Number 28, Washington, DC, February 2010, Figures 6 and 14 and
Tables 9 and 16, available at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_23/sr23_028.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
7
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
fluctuated in a range between 39% and 45% between 1960 and 2009. In 2009, 54% of women
aged 62 or older relied to some extent on benefits received as a spouse or survivor: half (27%) of
spouse and survivor beneficiaries were dually entitled, whereas the other half received spouse or
survivor benefits only.
Figure 1. Basis of Entitlement for Women Aged 62 or Older,
1960-2008, Selected Years
100%
90%
80%
Dependents Only
70%
t
60%
n
e
50%
rc
Dual Entitlement
Pe
40%
30%
20%
Workers Only
10%
0%
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2009
Source: U.S. Social Security Administration, Annual Statistical Supplement, 2010, Washington, DC, table 5.A14,
http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2010/5a.html#table5.A14.
As shown in Table 2, among wives who are dually-entitled spousal beneficiaries in December
2009, the retired-worker benefit accounted for 68% of the combined monthly benefit (the retired-
worker benefit with a top-up provided by the spousal benefit) and the spousal benefit accounted
for 32% of the combined monthly benefit, on average. Among widows who are dually entitled
survivor beneficiaries, the retired-worker benefit and the widow(er)’s benefit each accounted for
about half of the combined monthly benefit, on average.24
Many more women than men are dually entitled to retired-worker benefits and spousal or
widow(er)’s benefits. As shown in the table, in December 2009, about 6.4 million women and
147,000 men were dually-entitled to benefits.25
24 U.S. Social Security Administration, Annual Statistical Supplement, 2009, Washington, DC, table 5.G4,
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2009/5g.html#table5.g4. The percentages reported
here may differ slightly from the percentages represented in the table due to rounding.
25 U.S. Social Security Administration, Annual Statistical Supplement, 2009, Washington, DC, table 5.G2,
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2009/5g.html#table5.g2.
Congressional Research Service
8
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Table 2. Average Benefit Levels Among Retired Workers
With Dual Entitlement, December 2009
Average Monthly Benefit:
Reduced
Combined
Retired-Worker
Secondary
Type of Secondary Benefit
Number
Benefit
Benefit
Benefit
Spouses 2,862,295
$714
$483
$231
Wives of Retired & Disabled
2,822,655 $715 $483
$232
Workers
Husbands of Retired &
39,640 $657 $488
$169
Disabled Workers
Widow(er)s 3,726,296
$1,293
$654
$639
Widows 3,619,057
$1,295
$646
$649
Widowers 107,239
$1,219
$915
$304
Source: U.S. Social Security Administration, Annual Statistical Supplement, 2010, Washington, DC, table 5.G3,
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/supplement/2010/5g.html#table5.g3.
Labor Force Participation of Women
In 1970, about 43% of women aged 16 or older participated in the labor force, compared with
about 80% of men aged 16 or older. By 2008, about 60% of women aged 16 or older participated
in the labor force, compared with 73% of men in the same age group. 26 The increase in labor
force participation among women since 1970 has led to an increase in the number of women who
qualify for Social Security benefits based on their own work records.
Labor Force Participation of Women with Children
In 2009, the United States had an estimated 5.3 million parents who stayed at home to care for
children. This included 5.1 million mothers and 158,000 fathers. Although these figures may
reflect economic conditions, the number of stay-at-home mothers was lower in 2009 than in 2008,
and the number of stay-at-home fathers was about the same.27
Women with children under the age of 18 have increasingly entered the labor force in recent
decades, as shown in Figure 2. The labor force participation rate of women with children under
the age of 18 increased from 47% to a peak of 73% in 2000. By 2004, the rate had receded to
71% and has remained at that level through 2008. The labor force participation rate of women
with children aged 6 to 17 (none younger) rose 23 percentage points over this period, from 55%
in 1975 to 78% in 2008. The labor force participation rate of women with children under the age
of 6 increased 25 percentage points over this period, from 39% in 1975 to 64% in 2008. In
general, women with children aged 6-17 are more likely to participate in the labor force (78%)
26 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Women in the Labor Force: A Databook, Washington, DC, September 2009, table 2,
http://www.bls.gov/cps/wlftable2.htm.
27 U.S. Census Bureau, Census Bureau Reports Families With Children Increasingly Face Unemployment, Washington,
DC, January 15, 2010, http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/families_households/014540.html.
Congressional Research Service
9
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
than women with children under the age of 6 (64%) or under the age of 3 (60%). In addition,
unmarried mothers are more likely to participate in the labor force (76%) than married mothers
(69%).28
Figure 2. Labor Force Participation Rate of Women with Children, 1975 to 2008
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
With Children Under Age 18
With Children 6 to 17, None Younger
With Children Under Age 6
With Children Under Age 3
No Children Under Age 18
Source: http://stats.bls.gov/cps/wlf-databook-2009.pdf., Table 7.
Women with children have fewer years of paid work, on average. By the age of 50, women
without children who were born between 1948 and 1958 (i.e., aged 52-62 in 2010) had worked on
average about two years less than men overall (i.e., men with and without children). For a woman
with two children, however, the gap at the age of 50 was about 6.5 years less than the average
man with or without children. By the age of 50, African American women (with and without
children) have worked, on average, about two years more than other women with and without
children.29
For many women, caregiving is also likely to lead to part-time work. Women are more likely than
men to work part time (i.e., less than 35 hours per week in a sole or principal job). In 2009, 26%
28 U.S. Department of Labor, Women in the Labor Force: A Databook, Washington, DC, September 2009, Tables 6 and
7, http://stats.bls.gov/cps/wlf-databook-2009.pdf.
29 Melissa M. Favreault and C. Eugene Steuerle, The Implications of Career Lengths for Social Security, The Urban
Institute, Discussion Paper 08-03, Washington, DC, 2008, http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/
411646_careerlengths.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
10
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
of women in wage and salary jobs worked part time, compared to 16% of men. These proportions
have changed little over time.30
In 2009, about 71% of mothers worked or were actively searching for work. About two-thirds of
mothers who worked in 2009 were in a dual-earner family. The remaining third were the sole job-
holders in their family, either because their spouses were unemployed or out of the labor force, or
because these mothers were heads of household.31
Women with more education and women in later birth cohorts are also likely to have longer
employment histories than other women.32 In 2008, women accounted for more than half of all
workers within several industry sectors: financial activities (women constituted 54.8% of
employees in this sector), education and health services (75.2%), and leisure and hospitality
(51.5%). However, women were under-represented (relative to their share of total employment) in
agriculture (23.9%), mining (12.9%), construction (9.7%), manufacturing (29.3%), and
transportation and utilities (23.1%).33
Earnings Gap
Another reason why women receive lower retired-worker benefits than men is that women who
were full-time wage and salary workers had median34 weekly earnings of $657, or about 80% of
the $819 median for their male counterparts.35 The women’s-to-men’s earnings ratio was about
62% in 1979. It increased gradually during the 1980s and 1990s and peaked at 81% in 2005 and
2006.
In 2009, the earnings gap between women and men varied among age groups (see Table 3).
Among full-time workers, women aged 16-24 earned 93% as much as men; women aged 25-34
earned about 89% as much as men; and women aged 55-64 earned about 75% as much as men.
30 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Highlights of Women’s Earnings in 2009, Washington, DC,
June 2010, page 3, http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswom2009.pdf.
31 U.S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee, Understanding the Economy: Working Mothers in the Great Recession,
committee print, prepared by the Committee’s majority staff, 111th Cong., May 2010.
32 Melissa M. Favreault and C. Eugene Steuerle, The Implications of Career Lengths for Social Security, The Urban
Institute, Discussion Paper 08-03, Washington, DC, 2008, http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/
411646_careerlengths.pdf.
33 U.S. Department of Labor, Women in the Labor Force: A Databook, Washington, DC, September 2009, Table 14,
http://stats.bls.gov/cps/wlf-databook-2009.pdfve.
34 If the population were ranked from lowest to highest based on earnings level, the earnings level at the middle of the
distribution would be the median value.
35 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Highlights of Women’s Earnings in 2009, Washington, DC,
June 2010, page 1, http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswom2009.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
11
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Table 3. Women’s Earnings as a Percent of Men’s Earnings, 1979 and 2009
Age
Women’s Earnings as a Percent of
Women's Earnings as a Percent of
Men's, 1979
Men's, 2009
Total, 16 years and older
62.3%
80.2%
16 to 24 years
78.6%
92.6%
16 to 19 years
85.2%
90.7%
20 to 24 years
76.3%
92.9%
Total, 25 years and older
62.1%
78.7%
25 to 34 years
67.5%
88.7%
35 to 44 years
58.3%
77.4%
45 to 54 years
56.8%
73.6%
55 to 64 years
60.6%
75.3%
65 years and older
77.6%
76.1%
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Highlights of Women's Earnings in 2009,
Washington, DC, June 2010, Table 12, http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswom2009.pdf
Note: Ratios are for men and women who are full-time wage and salary earners with median earnings.
Over time, the earnings gap between women and men has narrowed for most age groups. For
example, among full-time workers aged 25-34, the women’s-to-men’s earnings ratio increased
from 68% in 1979 to 89% in 2009. For workers aged 35-44, the earnings ratio increased from
58% in 1979 to 77% in 2009. Similarly, for workers aged 45-54, the earnings ratio increased from
57% in 1979 to 74% in 2009.
Comparing the annual earnings of women and men may understate differences in total earnings
across longer time periods. Using a 15-year timeframe (1983-1998), one study found that women
in the prime working years of 26 to 59 had total earnings over the 15-year period that were 38%
of what prime-age men earned, in total, over the same period.36
As women enter the work force in greater numbers, more women will qualify for Social Security
benefits based on their own work records, instead of a spousal benefit that is equal to 50% of the
husband’s PIA. However, retired-worker and disabled-worker benefits for women continue to be
lower than those for men on average for a range of reasons, as discussed above. Consequently,
after the death of a husband, the survivor’s benefit, which is equal to 100% of the husband’s PIA,
will continue to play an important role in the financial well-being of widows.
36 Stephen J. Rose and Heidi I. Hartmann, Still a Man’s Labor Market: The Long-Term Earnings Gap, Institute for
Women’s Policy Research, Washington, DC, 2004, http://www.iwpr.org/pdf/C355.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
12
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Adequacy and Equity Issues
Adequacy Issues
Social Security is a key component of total retirement income for both men and women. Figure 3
shows the extent to which men and women of different marital status rely on Social Security
benefits. The height of the columns represents the average proportion of each subgroup that relies
on Social Security for 50% or more (hatched bars), 90% or more (light bars), or 100% (dark bars)
of their total retirement income.
Figure 3. Relative Importance of Social Security to Total Retirement Income for
Persons Aged 65 or Older in 2006
70%
ity 60%
ecur
S 50%
al
ci
o 40%
S
50% or more
m
90% or more
fro 30%
100%
e
m
o
c 20%
n
f I
t o 10%
c
P
0%
d
d
r
d
d
d
r
d
ed
e
e
ed
e
e
rrie
rc
v
rrie
rrie
rc
v
rrie
o
o
Ma
idow
v
Ne
Ma
Ma
idow
v
Ne
Ma
W
Di
W
Di
Men
Women
Source: Social Security Administration, Income of the Population 55 or Older, 2006, Washington, DC, January
2009, Table 8.B3, http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/income_pop55/2006/sect08.html#table8.b3.
Cutting this data a different way (not shown in Figure 3), among men aged 65 or older in 2006
who relied on Social Security benefits for 100% of their retirement income: 8.7% were married,
14.2% were widowed, 18.7% were divorced, and 21.1% were never married. Among women
aged 65 or older in 2006 who relied on Social Security benefits for 100% of their retirement
income: 9.6% were married, 19.5% were widowed, 17.5% were divorced, and 13.4% were never
married.
Congressional Research Service
13
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Social Security is credited with keeping many of the nation’s elderly out of poverty. However, in
2006, 7.5% of Social Security beneficiaries aged 65 or older were below the poverty line.37
Figure 4 highlights the differences in poverty status among men and women aged 65 or older
who receive Social Security benefits, after Social Security is combined with other sources of
income such as earnings from work, pensions, income from assets and cash public assistance.38
The data in the figure are for 2006. In 2006, the poverty threshold for a single person aged 65 or
older was $9,669 and for a married couple with at least one member aged 65 or older it was
$12,186.39
Figure 4. Poverty Status of Social Security Beneficiaries Aged 65 or Older in 2006 by
Gender and Marital Status
25%
e
in
L 20%
rty
e
v
o 15%
P
w
lo
10%
Be
e
g
ta
5%
en
rc
e
P
0%
Married
Nonmarried
Widowed
Divorced
Never
Married
Marital Status
Women Age 65 or Older
Men Age 65 or Older
Source: Social Security Administration, Income of the Population 55 or Older, 2006, Washington, DC, January
2009, Table 11.3, http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/income_pop55/2006/sect11.html#table11.3.
Figure 4 shows that non-married women—including widowed, divorced and never-married
women—are more likely to be in poverty than their male counterparts. Particularly vulnerable
among women are divorced beneficiaries and the never-married. Among women, about 17% of
divorced Social Security beneficiaries and 23% of never-married Social Security beneficiaries
have total incomes below the official poverty line. Research using data from the early 1990s
found that divorced beneficiaries have unusually high incidence of both serious health problems
37 Social Security Administration, Income of the Population 55 or Older, 2006, Washington, DC, January 2009, Table
11.1, http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/income_pop55/2006/sect11.html#table11.1.
38 In 2009, the poverty threshold for a single person aged 65 or older was $10,289, and for a married couple with at
least one member aged 65 or older it was $12,968. U.S. Census Bureau, Poverty Thresholds for 2009 by Size of Family
and Number of Related Children Under 18 Years, http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/threshld/thresh09.html.
39 U.S. Census Bureau, Poverty Thresholds 2006, http://www.census.gov/hhes/www3.poverty/threshld/thresh06.html.
Congressional Research Service
14
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
and poverty.40 Poverty rates are also high among never-married women, and in particular among
never-married minority women.41
The poverty rate among widows receiving Social Security and other income fell from 41% in
1967 to 13% in 2008. By comparison, the poverty rate among widows who do not receive Social
Security fell from 40% in 1967 to 33% in 2008. The drop in the poverty rate among widows who
receive Social Security could be attributed in part to congressional action in 1972 to raise the
benefit rate for widows to the current-law rate of 100% of the deceased worker’s benefit (in 1967,
2 out of every 5 widows aged 65 or older who were receiving Social Security had income below
the poverty line, but by 1973 the poverty rate among this group had fallen to just over 23%).
Disabled widows remain at particular risk for poverty, however. About 39% of disabled widows
who are eligible for Social Security and 59% of disabled widows who are not eligible for Social
Security have total income below the poverty line.42
The reasons for the disparity in poverty rates among elderly men and women relate in part to
women’s lower lifetime earnings, which affect Social Security benefits and pensions. In addition,
women live two to three years longer than men on average, making them more likely to exhaust
retirement savings and other assets before death. If the deceased husband was receiving a
pension, the widow’s benefit may be significantly reduced, or the pension may cease with the
husband’s death, depending on whether the couple had a joint and survivor annuity and how the
joint and survivor annuity was structured. Elderly widows also may be at risk if assets are
depleted by health-related expenses prior to the death of a spouse.
Equity Issues
Although Social Security provides essential income support to non-working spouses and widows,
the current-law spousal benefit structure can lead to a variety of incongruous benefit patterns that
have been documented in the literature.43 For example, a woman who was never employed but is
married to a man with high Social Security-covered wages may receive a Social Security spousal
benefit that is higher than the retirement benefit received by a single woman, or a woman who
was married less than 10 years, who worked a full career in a low-wage job.
The current system also provides proportionately more benefits relative to payroll tax
contributions to one-earner couples (which predominated when Social Security was created in the
1930s) than to single persons or to couples with two-earners, on average. As a result, the current
40 David A. Weaver, “The Economic Well-Being of Social Security Beneficiaries, With an Emphasis on Divorced
Beneficiaries,” Social Security Bulletin, vol. 60, no. 4 (1997).
41 Madonna Harrington Meyer, Douglas A. Wolf, and Christine L. Himes, Linking Benefits to Marital Status: Race and
Diminishing Access to Social Security Spouse and Widow Benefits in the U.S., Center for Retirement Research, Boston
College, CRR WP 2004-5, Boston, MA, March 2004. See also Christopher R. Tamborini, Howard Iams, and Kevin
Whitman, “Marital History, Race and Social Security Spouse and Widow Benefit Eligibility in the United States,”
Research on Aging, vol. 31, no. 5 (May 2009), pp. 577-605, http://roa.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/31/5/577. See
also Richard W. Johnson, Melissa M. Favreault, and Joshua H. Goldwyn, Employment, Social Security, and Future
Retirement Outcomes for Single Mothers, The Urban Institute, Washington, DC, July 2003.
42 David A. Weaver, “Widows and Social Security,” Social Security Bulletin, vol. 70, no. 3 (2010), pp. 89-109.
43 See, for example, Christopher R. Tamborini and Kevin Whitman, “Women, Marriage and Social Security Benefits
Revisited,” Social Security Bulletin, vol. 67, no. 4 (2007). See also Alicia H. Munnell, Geoffrey Sanzenbacher, and
Mauricio Soto, Working Wives Reduce Social Security Replacement Rates, Center for Retirement Research, Number 7-
15, Boston, MA, October 2007.
Congressional Research Service
15
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
system can lead to situations where Social Security provides unequal benefits to one-earner and
two-earner couples with the same total household earnings. Putting this in a different perspective,
some two-earner couples may have to contribute significantly more to Social Security to receive
the same retirement and spousal benefits that the system provides to a one-earner couple with
identical total household earnings. These anomalies have become more widespread in recent
decades as women’s share of household income has increased, and also as women have
increasingly become heads of families.
Table 4 illustrates the disparate treatment of one-earner and two-earner couples with examples
developed by the American Academy of Actuaries. In the table, a one-earner couple with
household earnings of $34,200 is compared with two different two-earner couples. The second
couple in the comparison is a two-earner couple with the same total household earnings ($34,200)
as the one-earner couple, with the earnings evenly split between the two spouses (each spouse
earns $17,100). The third couple in the comparison is a two-earner couple in which one spouse
earns $34,200 (the same as the primary earner in the one-earner couple) and the other spouse
earns half that amount, or $17,100, for total household earnings of $51,300.
Table 4. Benefits for Three Couples with Different Earnings Splits
Between Husband and Wife
Second Couple: Two
First Couple: One
Earners with Total
Third Couple: Two
Earner with Earnings of
Household Earnings of
Earners with Earnings
$34,200
$34,200 Split Evenly
of $34,200 and $17,100
Total household
$34,200 $34,200 $51,300
earnings
Spouse A earns
$34,200
$17,100
$34,200
Spouse B earns
$0
$17,100
$17,100
Annual Social Security
$2,120 $2,120 $3,180
payroll taxes (employee
share only)
Total monthly benefit
$2,025 total (equals $1,350
$1,750 total (equals $875
$2,225 total (equals $1,350
paid to couple at
worker benefit to Spouse A worker benefit to Spouse
worker benefit to Spouse
retirement
and $675 spousal benefit to A and $875 worker benefit
A and $875 worker benefit
Spouse B)
to Spouse B)
to Spouse B)
Total monthly benefit
$1,350 $875 $1,350
paid to survivor
Source: American Academy of Actuaries, Women and Social Security, Issue Brief, June 2007.
As the table illustrates, a one-earner couple may receive higher retirement and survivor benefits
than a two-earner couple with identical total household earnings. Specifically, the first couple
with one earner receives a total of $2,025 in monthly retirement benefits, compared to the second
couple with two earners which receives a total of $1,750 in monthly retirement benefits.
Similarly, the survivor of the one-earner couple receives $1,350 in monthly benefits (either as a
retired worker or as a surviving spouse). In comparison, the survivor of the two-earner couple
with identical total household earnings receives $875 in monthly benefits.
In the third couple shown in Table 4, both spouses work in Social Security-covered employment,
but in this example one spouse earns $34,200 annually and the other spouse earns $17,100. This
couple receives monthly benefits that are $200 higher than the monthly benefits received by the
Congressional Research Service
16
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
one-earner couple ($2,225 compared with $2,025); however, this couple has earned much more
over time ($17,100 annually) and contributed commensurately more in Social Security payroll
taxes ($1,060 annually). The survivor benefit received by the third couple is identical to that
received by the one-earner couple. Thus, the current-law Social Security spousal benefit structure
requires some two-earner couples to make substantially higher contributions for similar benefit
levels. With higher earnings but similar benefits to the one-earner couple, the third couple’s
replacement rate (i.e., initial monthly benefits as a percentage of pre-retirement earnings) is lower
than that of the one-earner couple.44
After the death of one spouse, the disparity in benefits between one-earner and two-earner
couples may increase, as shown in the table. In the one-earner couple, the surviving spouse
receives a benefit equal to two-thirds of the couple’s combined benefit (for a reduction equal to
one-third of the couple’s combined benefit).45 In a two-earner couple with equal earnings (the
second couple), the surviving spouse receives a benefit equal to one-half of the couple’s
combined benefit.
Further, the surviving spouse in the first couple (the one-earner couple) receives a larger monthly
benefit than the survivor of the second couple (a two-earner couple with earnings evenly split)—
$1,350 compared to $875—although both couples paid the same amount of Social Security
payroll tax contributions. Similarly, compared to the one-earner couple, the surviving spouse in
the third couple (a two-earner couple with unequal earnings and somewhat higher total earnings
than the one-earner couple) receives the same monthly benefit ($1,350) although the couple paid
a higher amount of Social Security payroll tax contributions. For both two-earner couples in these
examples, after the death of one spouse, the second earnings record does not result in the payment
of any additional benefits.46
In addition to inequities among couples with different work histories and earnings levels, the
current structure of Social Security auxiliary benefits creates inequities among the divorced.
Divorced spouses with 9½ years of marriage, for example, receive no Social Security spousal and
survivor benefits, whereas divorced spouses with 10 or more years of marriage may receive full
spousal and survivor benefits.
Other Considerations
The current structure of Social Security spousal and survivor benefits also raises other
considerations.
• Divorced spouses receive a higher benefit after the death of their former spouse
(the primary earner): benefits for a divorced spouse are equal to 50% of the
primary earner’s PIA, while benefits for a divorced surviving spouse are equal to
44 For further discussion of replacement rates among couples with different earnings histories, see Alicia H. Munnell,
Geoffrey Sanzenbacher, and Mauricio Soto, Working Wives Reduce Social Security Replacement Rates, Center for
Retirement Research, Number 7-15, Boston, MA, October 2007. The authors argue that wives’ entrance into the labor
market, and the ensuing rise in the ratio of wives’ earnings to husbands’ earnings, has lowered the replacement rate
received by average-earning married couples from 50% of pre-retirement income to 45% over the past 40 years.
45 On a combined basis, the couple received 150% of the worker’s PIA. The surviving spouse receives 100% of the
worker’s PIA. This results in a reduction equal to one third of the couple’s combined benefit.
46 American Academy of Actuaries, Women and Social Security, Issue Brief, June 2007. For a related discussion, see
“Survivor’s Benefit Increased to 75% of Couple’s Combined Benefit” below.
Congressional Research Service
17
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
100% of the primary earner’s PIA. This can create volatility in the income of
divorced spouses.
• Social Security automatically provides pension rights to one or more eligible
divorced spouses, in contrast to private pensions. Further, the benefit payable to
the primary earner is not reduced for benefits paid to a current and/or one or
more former spouses, again in contrast to private pensions.
• Widow(er)s who had high-earning spouses may face steep remarriage penalties
for marrying a lower-earning second husband (if remarriage occurs before the
eligibility age for widow(er)’s benefits).
• For most married women who will depend on the spousal benefit, lifetime Social
Security benefits are maximized by claiming benefits as early as possible, unless
the benefit based on the wife’s work record is less than 40% of her husband’s in
which case the age differential between the two spouses becomes important in
determining the wife’s optimum claiming age.47
In response to the inequities and other issues described above, policymakers and researchers have
proposed a number of ways to restructure Social Security auxiliary benefits. Some of these
proposals are discussed in the following section.
Proposals for Restructuring Social Security
Auxiliary Benefits
A number of proposals have been put forward to modify the current structure of Social Security
spousal and survivor benefits. These proposals have different potential consequences for benefit
levels for current, former and surviving spouses, for the re-distribution of benefits among couples
from different socio-economic levels, for what might be known as “gaming” the system to
receive the maximum benefits possible, for eligibility for means-tested programs such as
Supplemental Security Income and for work incentives.48
Earnings Sharing
Earnings sharing has been suggested as a way to address the unequal treatment of one-earner
versus two-earner couples under current law. As noted above, Social Security often provides
substantially higher benefits to one-earner couples than to two-earner couples with the same total
household earnings. In addition, earnings sharing has sometimes been suggested as a way to
provide benefits to divorced women whose marriages did not last long enough (at least 10 years)
47 Alicia H. Munnell and Mauricio Soto, Why Do Women Claim Social Security Benefits So Early?, Center for
Retirement Research, Boston, MA, October 2005. The reason is that the increase in the monthly benefit from waiting to
claim at the wife’s FRA is generally too small to offset the reduction in total spousal benefits that is expected to occur
based on men’s lower-than-average life expectancy. After the husband dies, the survivor benefit is equal to 100% of the
deceased husband’s PIA, regardless of when the wife first claimed benefits.
48 For the proposals discussed in this section of the report, an estimate of the proposal’s effect on the Social Security
trust fund is provided when a recent estimate is available from the Social Security Administration’s Office of the Chief
Actuary.
Congressional Research Service
18
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
to qualify them for divorced spouse or survivor benefits. By definition, earnings sharing would
not affect never-married persons.
Under the most basic form of earnings sharing, spousal and survivor benefits would be
eliminated. Instead, for each year of marriage, a couple’s covered earnings would be added
together and divided evenly between the spouses. For years when an individual is not married, his
or her own earnings would be recorded. If a person has multiple marriages, the earnings sharing
would occur during each period of marriage. Both members of a couple would have individual
earnings records reflecting shared earnings as a member of the couple as well as any earnings
before or after the marriage. Social Security benefits would be computed separately for each
member of the couple, based on the individual earnings records and using the current-law benefit
formula. For couples who were married for the entire career of one or both members, both
members of the couple would receive identical benefits and the couple’s combined benefit would
be equal to twice that of either member of the couple. The two spouses would receive different
benefits, however, if either had earnings before or after the marriage.
Earnings sharing proposals would reduce benefits for the majority of individuals, relative to
current law, and in the absence of other benefit enhancements. For example, a 2009 Social
Security Administration (SSA) study (hereafter, 2009 SSA Study)49 found that 61% of individuals
would receive average benefit reductions of about 17%. About 11% of individuals would
experience no change in benefits, and 28% would experience benefit increases averaging about
10%.
A report issued by the House Committee on Ways and Means in 1985 examined the impact of a
generic earnings sharing plan, as described above, on one-earner and two-earner couples in 2030.
In the absence of transition provisions, about 64% of men and about 37% of women would have
lower benefits than under current law. Average benefits for aged beneficiaries would decline by
about 4.5%.50
Studies have found that the largest benefit reductions under earnings sharing could affect widows
and divorced widows, particularly those in the lowest socioeconomic groups. The 2009 SSA
study found that about 93% of widows would experience an average benefit reduction of 27%
while 45% of divorced women would experience benefit reductions averaging about 22%.51 The
1985 congressional study found that 67% of widows would experience lower benefits with the
benefit loss averaging 29%, while 39% of divorced women would experience lower benefits with
the benefit loss among this group averaging 31%. The decline in widow’ benefits results from
eliminating the surviving spouse benefit under current law and replacing it with earnings credits.
The widow’s benefit under current law is equal to 100% of the husband’s PIA, where the
husband’s PIA is determined based on unshared earnings. Although earnings sharing would
increase the amount of earnings credited to the surviving wife (assuming the husband was the
higher earner), the benefit payable to the surviving wife based on shared earnings would be lower
than the current-law widow’s benefit. Another study found that, in short, the gains experienced by
49 Howard M. Iams, Gayle L. Reznik, and Christopher R. Tamborini, “The Effects of Earnings Sharing on U.S. Social
Security Benefits in 2030: An Application of the MINT Microsimulation Model,” Social Security Bulletin, vol. 69, no.
1 (2009). SSA’s study focuses on the impact of earnings sharing on benefits received by the population that will be age
62 or older in 2030.
50 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Ways and Means, Subcommittee on Social Security, Report on Earnings
Sharing Implementation Study, 99th Cong., 1st sess., February 14, 1985.
51 The 2009 SSA study also found that 96% of widowers would experience an average benefit reduction of 20%.
Congressional Research Service
19
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
divorce(e)s and some married women under earnings sharing would come largely at the expense
of widowed men and women.52
Some earnings sharing proposals would mitigate these effects by providing enhanced benefits to
survivors or other targeted groups. For example, an “inheritance provision” could allow a
surviving spouse to count all (instead of half) of a deceased spouse’s earnings (or those of a
deceased former spouse) during each year of marriage, in addition to all of his or her own
earnings. An inheritance provision would protect some, though not all, surviving spouses. For
example, the 2009 SSA study found that 40% of widows would receive lower benefits relative to
current law under earnings sharing with an inheritance provision.
Alternatively, benefits for surviving spouses could be based on an amount equal to two-thirds of
the combined benefit the couple was receiving when both members of the couple were alive (see
“Survivor’s Benefit Increased to 75% of Couple’s Benefit” below), or special provisions could be
targeted to surviving disabled spouses.53
Provisions to protect survivors from benefit reductions, however, would reduce the amount of
savings that would otherwise be achieved through program changes. Similarly, provisions to
increase benefits for survivors relative to current law would increase program costs. A higher
survivor benefit could be self-financed by reducing, on an actuarially-fair basis, the combined
benefit the couple receives while both members of the couple are alive.54
Divorcé(e) Benefits
Under the Social Security program, a divorced spouse must have been married to the worker for
at least 10 years to qualify for spousal and survivor benefits based on the worker’s record, as
discussed above. Benefits for divorced spouses are equal to 50% of the worker’s PIA; benefits for
divorced surviving spouses are equal to 100% of the worker’s PIA. One approach to extend
Social Security spousal and survivor benefits to more divorced spouses would be to lower the 10-
year marriage requirement (for example, to 5 or 7 years). Proposals to lower the length-of-
marriage requirement for divorced spouses would improve benefit adequacy for some, although
not all, divorced women.
One study estimated that lowering the marriage-duration requirement from 10 to 7 years would
increase benefits for about 8% of all divorced women aged 62 or older in the year 2030.
Lowering the marriage-duration requirement to five years would increase benefits for about 14%
of all divorced women in the year 2030. The study found that, among divorced women aged 62
and over who would receive higher benefits as a result of lowering the marriage-duration
requirement to five or seven years, the outcomes were moderately progressive in the sense that
they channeled a greater share of benefit increases to low-income and non-college-educated
divorced women in old age. For example, under a seven-year marriage-duration requirement,
about 13% of divorced women in the lowest retirement income quintile would receive a benefit
52 Melissa M. Favreault and C. Eugene Steuerle, Social Security Spouse and Survivor Benefits for the Modern Family,
The Urban Institute/The Retirement Security Project, Discussion Paper 07-01, Washington, DC, March 2007, page 19.
53 Congressional Budget Office, Earnings Sharing Options for the Social Security System, Washington, DC, January
1986.
54 Melissa M. Favreault and C. Eugene Steuerle, Social Security Spouse and Survivor Benefits for the Modern Family,
The Urban Institute/The Retirement Security Project, Discussion Paper 07-01, Washington, DC, March 2007.
Congressional Research Service
20
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
increase compared with around 6% in the highest quintile who would receive a benefit increase.
Among divorced women who gain, the average benefit in the lowest retirement income quintile
would rise by 63%, compared with an average increase of 26% among divorced women in the
highest quintile. However, 87% of divorced women in the lowest retirement income quintile
would not receive an increase in benefits under the seven-year marriage-duration option.55
Some researchers contend that the 50% benefit rate for divorced spouses (50% of the worker’s
PIA) is not sufficient to prevent many divorcé(e)s from falling into poverty.56 The 50% benefit
rate for spouses initially was established to supplement the benefit received by a one-earner
couple (i.e., in 1939, a spousal benefit was provided for a dependent wife to supplement the
benefit received by the worker). Some observers contend that it may not be sufficient for persons
(divorced spouses) who may be living alone. As described above, about 16.5% of divorced
women and 8.7% of divorced men have incomes below the poverty line, compared to 2.3% of
married men and women (see Figure 4 above). It has been estimated that increasing the benefit
rate for divorced spouses from 50% to 75% of the worker’s PIA would lower the poverty rate
among divorce(e)s from 30% to 11%.57
Increase Benefits for the Oldest Old
Another type of benefit modification would increase benefits for the oldest old (for example,
beneficiaries aged 80 or older) by a specified percentage of their benefit (such as 5% or 10%).
One rationale for this proposal is that beneficiaries tend to exhaust their personal savings and
other assets over time, becoming more reliant on Social Security at advanced ages. Another
rationale is that, after the age of 60, Social Security retirement benefits do not keep pace with
rising living standards. In particular, the formula for computing a worker’s initial retirement
benefit is indexed to national average wage growth through the age of 60 and then to price
inflation (the Consumer Price Index) starting at the age of 62. Once a beneficiary begins receiving
benefits, his or her benefits increase each year with price inflation (the annual cost-of-living
adjustment) so that the initial benefit amount is effectively fixed in real terms. Living standards,
however, tend to rise over time at a pace that exceeds price inflation.
One option would be to increase a beneficiary’s payment by 5% at the age of 80.58 According to
one study, this option would result in a slight decline in poverty rates among widows and non-
55 Christopher R. Tamborini and Kevin Whitman, “Lowering Social Security’s Duration-of-Marriage Requirement:
Distributional Effects for Future Female Retirees,” Journal of Women and Aging, vol. 22 (2010), pp. 184-203. For the
purposes of the study, a “benefit increase” is defined as a 1% or greater increase in the 2030 benefit amount under the
policy change, relative to current law. The study suggests that a large proportion of divorced female retirees in 2010
will have a retired-worker benefit (based on their own earnings histories) which exceeds the divorced-spouse benefit
(50% of the former spouse’s benefit), but which is less than the surviving divorced-spouse benefit (100% of the
deceased former spouse’s benefit). That is, much of the benefit increases in 2030 would accrue to divorced surviving
spouses who were receiving a retired-worker benefit while the former spouse was alive but became dually-entitled
upon the death of the former spouse before 2030. (Because the study addresses benefits in the year 2030, it does not
include some divorced women who would receive higher benefits upon the death of a former spouse at a later date.)
56 As discussed in David A. Weaver, “The Economic Well-Being of Social Security Beneficiaries, With an Emphasis
on Divorced Beneficiaries,” Social Security Bulletin, vol. 60, no. 4 (1997), p. 11.
57 Ibid, p. 11.
58 The Social Security Administration’s Office of the Chief Actuary estimates that a similar proposal to provide a 5%
increase to the benefit level of any beneficiary who is 85 or older at the beginning of 2010 or who reaches their 85th
birthday after the beginning of 2010 would increase the Social Security trust fund’s projected 75-year actuarial deficit
by 4.5% (based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2009 Social Security Trustees Report). The estimate is available
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
21
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
married retired-worker beneficiaries aged 80 or older (declines of 3% and 4%, respectively). The
same study found that this option is not well-targeted toward low-income beneficiaries: less than
30% of the additional benefits would accrue to beneficiaries in the bottom quintile of the income
distribution.59
Alternatively, a benefit increase for the oldest old could be limited to beneficiaries who receive a
below-poverty-level benefit. One proposal along these lines (“longevity insurance”) would
provide a benefit to persons aged 82 or older that would be pro-rated based on the number of
years the person contributed to Social Security.60
Minimum Benefit for Low Earners
Some observers argue that a carefully-designed minimum benefit has the potential to reduce
poverty rates among older women, including divorced and never-married women, more
efficiently than existing spousal and survivor benefits.61 Minimum benefit proposals are aimed at
improving the adequacy of benefits, in comparison with some other proposals that address issues
of equity among individuals and couples with different marital statuses.
Most minimum benefit proposals would require the worker to have between 20 and 30 years of
Social Security-covered earnings to qualify for a minimum benefit at the poverty line or
somewhat above it (for example, 120% of the poverty line).62 These work tenure requirements are
intended to address, although not resolve, concerns that providing a minimum benefit could
discourage work effort. Setting eligibility for a minimum benefit at 20 to 30 years of covered
earnings would allow many workers to take several years out of the labor force to care for
children (or other family members) and still receive a higher benefit than they would have
qualified for in the absence of a minimum benefit. Arguably, intermittent work histories play a
greater role than long-term low earnings in leading to below-poverty-level benefits among
women.63 Therefore, proposals for a minimum benefit based on a specified number of years of
(...continued)
on SSA’s website at http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/provisions/charts/chart_run343.pdf.
59 Sharmila Choudhury, Michael V. Leonesio, and Kelvin R. Utendorf, et al., Analysis of Social Security Proposals
Intended to Help Women: Preliminary Results, Social Security Administration, Office of Research, Evaluation, and
Statistics, ORES Working Paper No. 88, Washington, DC, January 2001, p. 21.
60 John Turner, “Longevity Insurance: Strengthening Social Security at Advanced Ages” in Strengthening Social
Security for Vulnerable Groups, ed. National Academy of Social Insurance (Washington, DC, 2009), pp. 45-48. The
full report is available at http://www.nasi.org/sites/default/files/research/
Strengthening_Social_Security_for_Vulnerable_Groups.pdf.
61 Melissa M. Favreault, Gordon B.T. Mermin, and C. Eugene Steuerle, Minimum Benefits in Social Security, AARP
Public Policy Institute, Washington, DC, August 2006, p. 13. See also Pamela Herd, “Ensuring a Minimum: Social
Security Reform and Women,” The Gerontologist, vol. 45, no. 1 (2005), pp. 12-25.
62 The second model proposed by the President’s Commission to Strengthen Social Security in 2001 would provide a
minimum benefit set at 120% of the poverty line, payable to minimum-wage workers with 30 or more years of covered
earnings. The Commission’s third model would provide a minimum benefit set at 100% of the poverty line for
minimum-wage workers with 30 years of covered earnings, increasing to 111% of the poverty line for minimum-wage
workers with 40 years of covered earnings. See President’s Commission to Strengthen Social Security, Strengthening
Social Security and Creating Personal Wealth for All Americans, Washington, DC, December 21, 2001,
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/csss/reports/Final_report.pdfm, models 2 and 3.
63 Melissa M. Favreault, A New Minimum Benefit for Low Lifetime Earners, The Urban Institute: Retirement Policy
Program, Washington, DC, March 2009.
Congressional Research Service
22
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
covered employment could be combined with modified spousal benefits or with a caregiver credit
to balance recognition of longer work effort with recognition of the requirements of caregiving.64
Some women, however, do not reach 20 years of covered earnings. About 40% of women aged 60
to 64 in 2000 had fewer than 20 years of earnings.65 This percentage is likely to decline in
younger cohorts. Moreover, minimum benefit provisions may have the unintended effect of
providing minimum benefits to workers with high earnings but sporadic work histories.
To maintain the minimum benefit at a constant ratio to average living standards, some proposals
would link the minimum benefit to wage growth instead of setting the minimum benefit equal to a
specified percentage of the poverty line.66 The official poverty line is indexed to price growth,
whereas living standards rise with increases in wages and productivity. Wage growth generally
outpaces price growth.67
Social Security already has a “special minimum” benefit designed to help workers with long
careers at low wages. The number of beneficiaries who receive the special minimum benefit
under current law declines each year. The Social Security Administration has estimated that the
special minimum benefit will disappear for workers reaching age 62 in 2012 and later.68 In 2009,
the special minimum benefit was paid to 82,337 beneficiaries.69 A worker is awarded the special
minimum benefit only if it exceeds the worker’s regular benefit. The value of the special
minimum benefit, which is indexed to prices, is rising more slowly than the value of the regular
Social Security benefit, which is indexed to wages. Some researchers propose modernizing the
special minimum benefit to make it more relevant today, for example, by tying it to a poverty
level that is in line with the recommendations of the National Academy of Social Insurance.70
If a new minimum benefit is provided, it would be necessary to address interactions between
Social Security benefits and eligibility for Supplemental Security Income, Medicaid and other
means-tested programs for low-income individuals.71
64 Melissa M. Favreault, A New Minimum Benefit for Low Lifetime Earners, The Urban Institute: Retirement Policy
Program, Washington, DC, March 2009.
65 Ibid, Table 4.
66 For example, the third model proposed by the President’s Commission to Strengthen Social Security would link the
minimum benefit to average wage growth. See President’s Commission to Strengthen Social Security, Strengthening
Social Security and Creating Personal Wealth for All Americans, Washington, DC, December 21, 2001,
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/csss/reports/Final_report.pdfm, model 3.
67 While projected growth in wages over time is expected to help reduce poverty among the elderly in the future
(because initial monthly Social Security benefits are indexed to average wage growth), this may be offset by benefit
reductions for future beneficiaries to address Social Security’s projected long-range financial imbalance.
68 Email from Social Security Administration staff, September 8, 2010..
69 Annual Statistical Supplement, 2010, Social Security Administration, Washington, DC, table 5.A8.
70 Laura Sullivan, Tatjana Meschede and Thomas M. Shapiro, “Enhancing Social Security for Low-Income Workers:
Coordinating an Enhanced Minimum Benefit with Social Safety Net Provisions for Seniors” in Strengthening Social
Security for Vulnerable Groups, ed. National Academy of Social Insurance (Washington, DC, 2009), pp. 27-30. The
full report is available at http://www.nasi.org/sites/default/files/research/
Strengthening_Social_Security_for_Vulnerable_Groups.pdf.
71 The Social Security Administration’s Office of the Chief Actuary provides actuarial estimates for a number of
proposals that would establish a new minimum benefit or alter the current-law special minimum benefit. Estimates are
available on SSA’s website at http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/provisions/benefitlevel.html#B6 (see proposals
under “B5: Minimum benefits”). For example, one proposal (item B5.1) would increase the PIA to a level such that a
worker with 30 years of earnings at the minimum wage level would receive an adjusted PIA equal to 120% of the
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
23
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Caregiver Credits and Drop-out Years for Caregiving
Women are more likely than men to take career breaks to care for a child or other relative, as
discussed above. The Social Security retired-worker benefit is based on the average of a worker’s
35 highest years of covered earnings. If a worker has fewer than 35 years of earnings, for
example due to years of unpaid caregiving, years of no earnings are entered as zeros in the
computation of career-average earnings. Years of zero earnings lower the worker’s career-average
earnings, resulting in a lower initial monthly benefit (see “Computation of the Primary Earner’s
Benefit” for further explanation).
One approach is to replace years of low or zero earnings with a caregiver credit equal to a
specified dollar amount. Some proposals would provide the same fixed credit to all eligible
persons.72 Other proposals would link the amount of the credit to foregone earnings, so that
higher earners would receive higher credits. The latter proposal would require that the caregiver
have been in the paid labor force previously. Some proposals to base benefits on caregiving,
rather than on marriage, would eliminate the current spousal benefit.73
A second approach is to drop years of caregiving, up to a fixed maximum number of years, from
the benefit computation period. This approach could be implemented either by dropping years of
zero earnings or by dropping years of low earnings.74 The proposal to drop years of zero earnings
(rather than low earnings) would require a person to leave the workforce completely. This could
be problematic for many women, making the proposal less likely to reach as many women as a
caregiver credit. Allowing a parent to drop up to five years of zero (or low) earnings for caring for
a child at home would cause the parent’s AIME (average indexed monthly earnings) to be
calculated based on the highest 30 years of earnings, rather than the highest 35 years of earnings
(the benefit computation period would be shortened from 35 years to 30 years). This change in
the benefit computation would result in higher initial monthly benefits for these workers (and
higher benefits for family members who receive benefits based on their work records).
(...continued)
federal poverty level for an aged individual. SSA estimates that the proposal would increase the Social Security trust
fund’s projected 75-year actuarial deficit by 2.0% (based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2009 Social Security
Trustees Report). The estimate, including more information on the proposal, is available on SSA’s website at
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/provisions/charts/chart_run229.pdf.
72 For example, during the 2000 presidential campaign, former Vice President Gore proposed that parents be allowed to
substitute half the average wage for up to 5 years of caregiving for one child and up to 9 years of caregiving for two or
more children. (To put this into perspective, in 2010, the Social Security average wage index is an estimated $43,084;
half the average wage index would be about $21,542 in 2010.)
73 The Social Security Administration’s Office of the Chief Actuary provides actuarial estimates for a proposal to give
parents earnings credits for up to 5 years if they have a child under the age of 6. Under the proposal, the earnings
credited for a childcare year would be equal to one-half of the Social Security average wage index (or about $21,542 in
2010). SSA estimates that the proposal would increase the Social Security trust fund’s projected 75-year actuarial
deficit by 12.0% (based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2009 Social Security Trustees Report). The estimate,
including more information on the proposal, is available on SSA’s website at http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/
provisions/charts/chart_run206.pdf.
74 The 1979 Advisory Council on Social Security recommended offering drop-out years scaled to the length of service,
with a maximum of 6 drop-out years (as reported in: U.S. Congress, Senate Special Committee on Aging, Summary of
Recommendations and Surveys on Social Security and Pension Policies, committee print, 96th Cong., October 1980).
The National Commission on Social Security in 1981 proposed that parents be able to credit up to 10 years of child
care for children under age 6 to be counted toward qualifying for the special minimum benefit (see National
Commission on Social Security, Final Report: Social Security in America’s Future, Washington, DC, March 1981).
Congressional Research Service
24
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Policies to credit years of caregiving in the provision of public pension benefits have been
implemented in other countries in different ways. In making such a provision, one question to
consider is whether the credit should be available only to parents who have stopped working
completely or also to parents who continue to work part-time or full-time. Another question to
consider is whether to provide credits only for the care of young children or also for the care of
other immediate family members such as an aging parent. Canada excludes years of caring for
children under the age of 7 from the averaging period in the pension calculation and from the
contributory period under its earnings-related scheme. Germany provides pension points (equal to
a year’s contributions at the national average earnings) for three years per child, which can be
taken by either the employed or non-employed parent, or shared between parents.75
Other recent proposals, however, would count additional years of earnings (more than 35 years)
in the Social Security benefit computation. For example, some proposals would increase the
averaging period from 35 to 38 years.76 These proposals are aimed at helping improve Social
Security’s projected long-range financial position and at encouraging people to work longer. Such
proposals generally would affect women disproportionately.
A criticism of proposals to drop or credit years of caregiving is that they may be of most benefit
to higher-wage households that can afford to forego one spouse’s earnings over a period of
several years. Lower-wage spouses, and single working mothers, may not be in a position to stop
working for any period of time. In addition, a practical issue involves ascertaining that years out
of the workforce are actually spent caring for children or other family members.
Survivor’s Benefit Increased to 75% of Couple’s Combined Benefit
Under current law, an aged surviving spouse receives the higher of his or her own retired-worker
benefit and 100% of the deceased spouse’s PIA. This leads to a reduction in benefits compared
with the combined benefit the couple was receiving when both members of the couple were alive.
The reduction ranges from one-third of the combined benefit for a one-earner couple to one-half
of the combined benefit for some two-earner couples.77 However, there is not always a
corresponding reduction in household expenses for the surviving member of the couple. Some
contend that 75% of the income previously shared by the couple (i.e., a reduction of 25%) more
closely approximates the income needed by the surviving spouse to maintain his or her standard
of living.78
One frequently mentioned proposal would increase the surviving spouse’s benefit to the higher of
(1) the deceased spouse’s benefit, (2) the surviving spouse’s own benefit, and (3) 75% of the
couple’s combined monthly benefit when both spouses were alive.79 The couple’s combined
75 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Pensions at a Glance, 2009, pp. 178 and 200.
76 See, for example, 1994-1996 Advisory Council on Social Security, Report vol. 1, Findings and Recommendations,
Washington, DC, January 1997, p. 19.
77 See the discussion under “Equity Issues.”
78 American Academy of Actuaries, Social Security Reform: Changes to the Benefit Formula and Taxation of Benefits,
Issue Brief, Washington, DC, October 2006, p. 7. See also 1994-1996 Advisory Council on Social Security, Report vol.
1, Findings and Recommendations, Washington, DC, January 1997, p. 19.
79 1994-1996 Advisory Council on Social Security, Report vol. 1, Findings and Recommendations, Washington, DC,
January 1997, p. 19. See also Joan Entmacher, “Strengthening Social Security Benefits for Widow(er)s: The 75 Percent
Combined Worker Benefit Alternative,” in Strengthening Social Security for Vulnerable Groups, ed. National
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
25
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
monthly benefit when both spouses were alive would be the sum of (1) the higher-earner’s benefit
and (2) the higher of the lower-earner’s worker benefit and spousal benefit. Some proposals for a
75% survivor benefit would target the provision to lower-income households by capping the
survivor benefit, for example, at the benefit amount received by the average retired-worker
beneficiary.80
A 75% minimum survivor benefit would increase benefits for many surviving spouses, both in
dollar terms and as a replacement rate for the combined benefit received by the couple when both
spouses were alive. For a one-earner couple, the benefit for the surviving spouse would increase
from 100% to 112% of the worker’s benefit (112% = 75% of 150% of the worker’s benefit that
the couple received when both spouses were alive). For a two-earner couple with similar earnings
histories, the surviving spouse’s benefit would increase from roughly 50% of the couple’s
combined benefit when both spouses were alive (under current law, the surviving spouse receives
the benefit received by the higher-earning spouse while he or she was alive) to 75% of the
couple’s combined benefit when both spouses were alive.
A 75% minimum survivor benefit provision would “reward” the second income of a two-earner
couple and improve equity between one-earner and two-earner couples. Under current law, upon
the death of either spouse, the earnings record of the lower-earning spouse does not result in the
payment of any additional benefits (i.e., in addition to the benefits payable on the earnings record
of the higher-earning spouse). Stated another way, the earnings record of the lower-earning
spouse effectively “disappears” with the death of either spouse.81
Because a 75% survivor benefit would increase costs to the Social Security system, some have
proposed financing it through a gradual reduction in the spousal benefit from 50% to 33% of the
primary earner’s benefit, while both spouses are alive.82 For a one-earner couple, the couple’s
combined benefit would be reduced from 150% to 133% of the worker’s benefit. This is broadly
consistent with the structure of private annuities, where the annuity payout is lower to adjust for a
longer expected payout period. As a result, more dually-entitled spouses would likely qualify for
(...continued)
Academy of Social Insurance (Washington, DC, 2009), pp. 23-26. The full report is available at http://www.nasi.org/
sites/default/files/research/Strengthening_Social_Security_for_Vulnerable_Groups.pdf.
80 President’s Commission to Strengthen Social Security, Strengthening Social Security and Creating Personal Wealth
for All Americans, Washington, DC, December 21, 2001, http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/csss/reports/Final_report.pdfm,
models 2 and 3. See also Peter A. Diamond and Peter R. Orszag, Saving Social Security: A Balanced Approach
(Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2004), p. 105.
81 The Social Security Administration’s Office of the Chief Actuary provides actuarial estimates for a proposal to
establish an alternative benefit for a surviving spouse in cases where both the husband and wife established insured
status as retired workers. Under the proposal, the alternative benefit for the surviving spouse would be equal to 75% of
the sum of the surviving spouse’s own retired-worker benefit and the worker PIA (including any delayed retirement
credits) of the deceased spouse. The alternative benefit would be payable if it is higher than the benefit payable under
current law and could not exceed the benefit of a worker who is born and becomes eligible for retired-worker benefits
in the same year as the surviving spouse and who earns the SSA average wage every year. SSA estimates that the
proposal would increase the Social Security trust fund’s projected 75-year actuarial deficit by 3.0% (based on the
intermediate assumptions of the 2009 Social Security Trustees Report). If the alternative benefit for the surviving
spouse were such that it could not exceed the benefit of a worker who is born and becomes eligible for retired-worker
benefits in the same year as the surviving spouse and who earns the taxable maximum amount every year, the proposal
would increase the Social Security trust fund’s projected 75-year actuarial deficit by 15%. The estimates are available
on SSA’s website at http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/index.html (see Table 2, items D2a and D2b).
82 Henry J. Aaron and Robert D. Reischauer, Countdown to Reform: The Great Social Security Debate (New York: The
Century Foundation, 2001), pp. 102-106.
Congressional Research Service
26
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
a retirement benefit based on their own work record only, because more dually-entitled spouses
would likely have a retired-worker benefit of their own that is equal to at least 33% (rather than
50%) of the higher-earning spouse’s retired-worker benefit.83
Reducing a one-earner couple’s combined monthly benefit to 133% of the worker’s benefit, as a
way to finance a 75% survivor benefit, could be problematic for low-income couples. Effectively,
the increased survivor benefit would help the survivors of both one-earner and two-earner
couples, but it would be financed by reducing the combined benefits of one-earner couples from
150% to 133% of the worker’s benefit. In addition, unless this proposal were modified for
divorced spouses, it would also reduce the spousal benefits received by divorce(e)s from 50% to
33% of the primary earner’s benefit. After the death of the primary earner, benefits for a
divorcé(e) would jump to 100% of the primary earner’s benefit, creating income volatility unless
this outcome is addressed for divorcé(e)s.
Although the 75% survivor benefit option could increase benefits for vulnerable groups such as
aged widows, it would not address the needs of other vulnerable groups, such as individuals who
were never married or who divorced before reaching 10 years of marriage. In addition, a 75%
survivor benefit option would provide somewhat more additional benefits to higher-income
beneficiaries than to lower-income beneficiaries. To address this outcome, as noted above, some
proposals would cap the 75% survivor benefit at the average retired-worker benefit.
Conclusion
This report described the current-law structure of Social Security auxiliary benefits for spouses,
former spouses and surviving spouses. When Social Security auxiliary benefits were established
in 1939, they were based on the typical family structure at the time consisting of a single wage-
earner—generally the husband—and a wife who stayed at home to care for children and remained
out of the paid workforce. As a result, a woman who was never employed but is married to a man
with high Social Security-covered wages may receive a Social Security spousal benefit that is
larger than the retirement benefit received by a single woman, or a woman who was married less
than 10 years, who worked a full career in a low-wage job. In recent decades, this family structure
has changed: women have entered the workforce in increasing numbers, more men and women
remain single, and divorce rates have risen. As a result, more women now qualify for Social
Security retirement benefits based on their own work records.
Social Security auxiliary benefits, however, continue to play a crucial role in improving income
security for older women, as well as for young surviving spouses and children of deceased
workers. Women in particular continue to be vulnerable to poverty in old-age and depend on the
income support provided by Social Security.
Some policymakers and researchers have expressed concerns about the current structure of Social
Security auxiliary benefits on both equity and adequacy grounds. The current structure can lead to
83 The Social Security Administration’s Office of the Chief Actuary provides actuarial estimates for a proposal to
reduce the spousal benefit from 50% to 33% of the PIA of the other spouse. Under the proposal, the spousal benefit as a
percentage of the other spouse’s PIA would be reduced by 1 percentage point each year until it reaches 33%. SSA
estimates that the proposal would reduce the Social Security trust fund’s projected 75-year actuarial deficit by 6.0%
(based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2009 Social Security Trustees Report). The estimate is available on
SSA’s website at http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/provisions/charts/chart_run309.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
27
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
situations in which a one-earner couple receives higher retirement and survivor benefits than a
two-earner couple with identical total household earnings. In addition, auxiliary benefits do not
reach certain groups, such as persons who divorced before 10 years of marriage or mothers who
never married.
This report presented a number of recent proposals for modifying the current structure of Social
Security spousal and survivor benefits. Each of the proposals generally targets benefit increases to
certain, but not all, vulnerable groups. For example, an enhanced widow(er)’s benefit would
provide income support to many elderly women and men, but it would not help those who
divorced before 10 years of marriage or who never married. Similarly, a caregiver credit for
workers who stay at home to care for young children would increase benefits for never-married
and divorced women, but it would not help those without children, whether married or unmarried.
The consideration of potential changes to Social Security spousal and survivor benefits involves
balancing improvements in benefit equity, for example, between one-earner and two-earner
couples, with improvements in benefit adequacy for persons who experience relatively higher
poverty rates, such as never-married men and women. In addition, the policy discussion about
auxiliary benefits may involve balancing benefit increases for spouses and survivors, divorced
spouses, or never-married persons with other potential program changes to offset the higher
program costs in light of the Social Security system’s projected long-range financial outlook.84
84 For additional reading, see Social Security Modernization: Options to Address Solvency and Benefit Adequacy,
Report of the Special Committee on Aging, United States Senate, S.Rept. 111-187, 111th Congress, Second Session,
May 13, 2010, http://aging.senate.gov/ss/ssreport2010.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
28
Appendix A. Major Changes in Social Security Auxiliary Benefits
Amendment Type of Benefit
Amendment Type of Benefit
Retired Workers
Dependents of Disabled Workers
1935
Retired worker aged 65 and older
1958
Same as dependents of retired-worker recipient
1956
Retired woman aged 62-64
Survivors
1961
Retired man aged 62-64
Widowed Mother
1939
Widowed mother any age caring for eligible child
Disabled Workers
1956
Disabled worker aged 50-64
Widow
1960
Disabled worker under age 65
1939
Widow aged 65 and older
1956
Widow aged 62-64
Dependents of Retired Workers
1965
Widow aged 60-61
Wife
1965
Divorced widow aged 60 and older
1939
Wife aged 65 and older
1967
Disabled widow aged 50-59
1950
Wife under age 65 caring for eligible child
1956 Wife
aged
62-64
Widower
1950
Dependent widower aged 65 and older
Child
1961
Dependent widower aged 62-64
1939
Child under 18
1967
Disabled dependent widower aged 50-61
1956
Disabled child aged 18 and older
1972
Widower aged 60-61
1965
Full-time student aged 18-21
1981
Student category eliminated except for high school
Widowed Father
students under age 19
1975a
Widowed father caring for eligible child
Husband
Child
1950
Husband aged 65 and older
1939
Child under age 18
1961
Husband aged 62-64
1956
Disabled child aged 18 and older
1978a
Husband under age 65 caring for eligible child
1965
Full-time student aged 18-21
1981
Student category eliminated except for high school
Divorced Wife
students under age 19
1965
Divorced wife age 62 and older
Parent
Divorced Husband
1939
Dependent parent aged 65 and older
1976a
Divorced husband aged 62 and older
1956
Dependent female parent aged 62-64
1961
Dependent male parent aged 62-64
Source: CRS Report RL30565, Social Security: Summary of Major Changes in the Cash Benefits Program, May 18, 2000 (out of print).
a. Effective date: based on court decisions, not changes in the law. In 1983, the law was changed to reflect the court decisions.
CRS-29
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Appendix B. Computation of the Social Security
Retired-Worker Benefit
To be eligible for a Social Security retired-worker benefit, a person generally needs 40 quarters of
coverage, or 10 years of Social Security-covered employment (among other requirements).85 A
worker’s initial monthly benefit is based on his or her 35 highest years of earnings, which are
indexed to historical wage growth to bring past earnings in line with current wage levels
(earnings through the age of 60 are indexed; earnings thereafter are counted at nominal value).
The 35 highest years of indexed earnings are divided by 35 to determine the worker’s career-
average annual earnings. The resulting amount is divided by 12 to determine the worker’s average
indexed monthly earnings (AIME). If a worker has fewer than 35 years of earnings in covered
employment (because of time out of the labor force for family caregiving, spells of
unemployment or other reasons), years of no earnings are entered as zeros.
The worker’s basic benefit amount (i.e., basic benefit before any adjustments for early or delayed
retirement) is called the primary insurance amount (PIA). The PIA is determined by applying a
formula to the AIME as shown in Table B-1. First, the AIME is sectioned into three brackets (or
levels) of earnings. Three progressive replacement factors—90%, 32%, and 15%—are applied to
the three different brackets of AIME. The three products derived from multiplying each
replacement factor and bracket of AIME are added together to get the worker’s PIA. Because the
replacement factors are progressive, the benefit formula replaces a higher percentage of the pre-
retirement earnings of workers with low career-average earnings than for workers with high
career-average earnings. For workers who become eligible for retirement benefits (i.e., those who
attain the age of 62), become disabled, or die in 2010, the PIA is determined as shown in the
example in Table B-1.
Table B-1. Computation of a Worker’s Primary Insurance Amount (PIA) in 2010
Based on an Illustrative AIME of $5,000
PIA for Worker with an
Factors
Three Brackets of AIME (2010)
Illustrative AIME of $5,000
90%
first $761 of AIME, plus
$684.90
32%
AIME over $761 and through $4,586,
$1,224.00
plus
15% AIME
over
$4,586
$62.10
Total (Worker’s PIA)
$1,971.00
Source: Congressional Research Service
85 A worker needs at least 40 quarters of coverage (QCs) for a Social Security retired-worker benefit and may earn a
maximum of 4 QCs per calendar year. In 2010, a worker obtains 1 QC for each $1,120 of covered earnings, up to a
maximum of 4 QCs for earnings of $4,480 or more. Fewer QCs may be required for Social Security disability benefits,
depending on the age at which the worker became disabled. For more information, see CRS Report RL32279, Primer
on Disability Benefits: Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), by Scott
Szymendera.
Congressional Research Service
30
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Adjustment to Benefits Claimed Before or After FRA
A worker’s initial monthly benefit is equal to his or her PIA if he or she begins receiving benefits
at FRA.86 A worker’s initial monthly benefit will be less than his or her PIA if he or she begins
receiving benefits before FRA, and it will be greater than his or her PIA if he or she begins
receiving benefits after FRA.
Retirement benefits are reduced by five-ninths of 1% (or 0.0056) of the worker’s PIA for each
month of entitlement before FRA up to 36 months, for a reduction of about 6.7% a year (from age
62 to age 65). For each month of entitlement before FRA in excess of 36 months (up to 24
months), retirement benefits are reduced by five-twelfths of 1% (or 0.0042) of the worker’s PIA,
for a reduction of 5% a year (from age 65 to age 67).
Workers who delay filing for benefits until after FRA receive a delayed retirement credit (DRC).
The DRC applies beginning with the month the worker attains FRA and ending with the month
before he or she attains the age of 70. Starting in 1990, the DRC was increased until it reached
8% per year for workers born in 1943 or later (i.e., the DRC reached 8% starting with workers
who attained age 62 in 2005 or age 66 in 2009).
The actuarial adjustment to benefits claimed before or after FRA is intended to provide the
worker with roughly the same total lifetime benefits regardless of the age at which he or she
begins receiving benefits (assuming he or she lives to average life expectancy). Therefore, if a
worker claims benefits before FRA, his or her monthly benefit is reduced to take into account the
longer expected period of benefit receipt. For a worker whose FRA is 66, the decision to claim
benefits at the age of 62 results in a 25% reduction in his or her PIA. For a worker whose FRA is
67, the decision to claim benefits at the age of 62 results in a 30% reduction in his or her PIA.
Similarly, if a worker claims benefits after FRA, his or her monthly benefit is increased to take
into account the shorter expected period of benefit receipt.
Other Adjustments to Benefits
Other benefit adjustments may apply, such as those related to simultaneous entitlement to more
than one type of Social Security benefit (for more information see the section above entitled
“Dually Entitled Beneficiaries”). Under the windfall elimination provision (WEP), the Social
Security benefit formula is modified to reduce benefits for persons who have pensions from non-
covered employment in federal, state, or local governments.87 The Social Security maximum
family benefit provision may cap total benefits received by members of a family, by reducing the
benefits of individual family members.88 Under the retirement earnings test (RET), the monthly
86 A worker may begin receiving retirement benefits as early as age 62; however, the FRA is the earliest age at which
full (unreduced) retirement benefits are first payable. The FRA ranges from age 65 to age 67 depending on the worker’s
year of birth. The FRA is 65 for workers born before 1938; it is increasing gradually to age 67 for workers born in 1938
or later. The FRA reaches 67 for workers born in 1960 or later. The Social Security Administration provides a chart
showing the full retirement age based on year of birth, plus examples of reductions for early benefit receipt, at this link:
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/retire2/agereduction.htm#chart.
87 For more information on the windfall elimination provision, see CRS Report 98-35, Social Security: The Windfall
Elimination Provision (WEP), by Alison M. Shelton.
88 The maximum family benefit varies from 150% to 188% of the retired or deceased worker’s PIA (see Section 203 of
the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 403). The family maximum cannot be exceeded regardless of the number of
beneficiaries entitled to benefits on the worker’s record. If the sum of all benefits based on the worker’s record exceeds
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
31
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Social Security benefit is reduced for persons who are below FRA and have wage or salary
incomes above an annual dollar threshold (annual exempt amount). 89
(...continued)
the maximum family benefit, each dependent’s or survivor’s benefit is reduced in equal proportion to bring the total
amount of benefits within the family maximum. For the family of a worker who attains age 62 or dies in 2010, the total
amount of benefits payable is limited to 150% of the first $972 of PIA, plus; 272% of PIA over $972 and through
$1,403, plus; 134% of PIA over $1,403 and through $1,830, plus; 175% of PIA over $1,830.
The dollar amounts in the benefit formula (known as “bend points”) are indexed to average wage growth, as in the
primary benefit formula. A different family maximum applies in the case of a disabled worker. For the family of a
worker who is entitled to disability benefits, the maximum family benefit is the lesser of 85% of the worker’s AIME or
150% of the worker’s PIA. In no case, however, can the family benefit be less than 100% of the worker’s PIA.
89 For more information on the retirement earnings test, see CRS Report R41242, Social Security Retirement Earnings
Test: How Earnings Affect Benefits, by Dawn Nuschler and Alison M. Shelton.
Congressional Research Service
32
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Appendix C. Summary of Social Security Spousal
and Widow(er)’s Benefits Under Current Law
Social Security benefits for spouses and widow(er)s are based on a percentage of the worker’s
primary insurance amount (PIA), with various adjustments for age at entitlement and other
factors. The following section describes some of the adjustments that apply to benefits for
spouses and widow(er)s.
Age-Related Benefit Adjustment for Spouses
Spousal benefits (including those for divorced spouses) are reduced when the spouse claims
benefits before FRA to take into account the longer expected period of benefit receipt (assuming
the individual lives to average life expectancy).90 A spouse who claims benefits at the age of 62
(the earliest eligibility age for retirement benefits) may receive a benefit that is as little as 32.5%
of the worker’s PIA.91
Age-Related Benefit Adjustments for Widow(er)s
The earliest age a widow(er) can claim benefits is age 60. If a widow or widower (including
divorced and disabled widow(er)s) claims survivor benefits before FRA,92 his or her monthly
benefit is reduced up to a maximum of 28.5%93 to take into account the longer expected period of
benefit receipt (assuming he or she lives to average life expectancy).
90 Spousal benefits are reduced by 25/36 of 1% (or 0.0069) for each month of entitlement before FRA, up to 36 months,
and by five-twelfths of 1% (or 0.0042) for each month of entitlement before FRA in excess of 36 months. The
reduction is applied to the base spousal benefit, which is 50% of the worker’s PIA. The spousal benefit is not reduced
for entitlement before FRA if the spouse is caring for a qualifying child.
91 For example, if the worker’s PIA is $1,000, the spousal benefit payable at the spouse’s FRA is 50% of this amount,
or $500. If the spouse claims benefits at age 62 and his or her FRA is 67, the spousal benefit is reduced by 35%, from
$500 to $325 per month. (The percent reduction for entitlement to benefits five years before FRA is found as the sum
of (25/36) * 36 months plus (5/12) * 24 months, for a total reduction of 35%.) The spouse’s benefit of $325 is equal to
32.5% of the worker’s PIA of $1,000. The following link at the Social Security Administration’s website allows users
to see how timing the receipt of spousal benefits can affect benefit amounts: http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/quickcalc/
spouse.html.
92 The FRA is increasing gradually from age 65 to age 67. While the FRA for retired workers and spouses will reach
age 67 for persons born in 1960 or later, it will reach age 67 for widow(er)s born in 1962 or later. The Social Security
Administration provides FRAs for widow(er)s based on year of birth, plus examples of reductions for early benefit
receipt, at this link: https://www.ssa.gov/survivorchartred.htm.
93 Survivor benefits are reduced for each month of entitlement before FRA by a fraction derived by dividing 28.5% (the
maximum reduction) by the number of possible months of early retirement, which is the number of months between
age 60 and the person’s FRA. For example, a person whose FRA is 66 could claim benefits at age 60 and potentially
receive benefits for up to 72 months before FRA. The reduction for each month before FRA is therefore 28.5% ÷ 72 =
0.00396. As a result of this methodology, the fractions involved in reducing the widow(er)’s benefit for entitlement
before FRA vary depending on the date of birth and the FRA associated with that birthdate. Survivor benefits paid from
ages 50 to 59 based on a disability are not further reduced. The maximum reduction of 28.5% and the procedure for
finding reduction amounts for widow(er)s who retire between age 60 and FRA are described in Social Security
Administration, Handbook, section 724, available at http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/handbook/handbook.07/
handbook-0724.html.
Congressional Research Service
33
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
In addition, survivor benefits may be affected by the deceased worker’s decision to claim benefits
before FRA. If the deceased worker claimed benefits before FRA (and therefore was receiving a
reduced benefit) and the widow(er) claims survivor benefits at FRA, the widow(er)’s benefit is
reduced under the widow(er)’s limit provision. Under the widow(er)’s limit provision, which is
intended to prevent the widow(er)’s benefit from exceeding the deceased worker’s retirement
benefit, the widow(er)’s benefit is limited to: (1) the benefit the worker would be receiving if he
or she were still alive, or (2) 82.5% of the worker’s PIA, whichever is higher.94, 95
Benefit Adjustments Based on Other Factors
Benefits for spouses and widow(er)s may be subject to other reductions, in addition to those
based on entitlement before FRA. For example, under the dual entitlement rule, a Social Security
spousal or widow(er)’s benefit is reduced or fully offset if the person also receives a Social
Security retired-worker or disabled-worker benefit (see “Dually Entitled Beneficiaries” above).
Similarly, under the Government Pension Offset, a Social Security spousal or widow(er)’s benefit
is reduced or fully offset if the person also receives a pension based on his or her own
employment in certain federal, state or local government positions that are not covered by Social
Security.96 In some cases, a spousal or widow(er)’s benefit may be reduced to bring the total
amount of benefits payable to family members based on the worker’s record within the maximum
family benefit amount (see Appendix B, “Other Adjustments to Benefits”).97
Under the Social Security retirement earnings test, auxiliary benefits may be reduced if the
auxiliary beneficiary is below the FRA and has earnings above specified dollar thresholds. Also,
under the RET, benefits paid to spouses may be reduced if the benefits are based on the record of
a worker beneficiary who is affected by the RET (excluding benefits paid to divorced spouses
who have been divorced for at least two years).
Table C-1 shows the percentage of a worker’s PIA on which various categories of spousal and
widow(er)’s benefits are based. It also shows the age at which benefits are first payable on a
reduced basis (the eligibility age) and the maximum reduction to benefits claimed before FRA
relative to the worker’s PIA.
94 For more information, see David A. Weaver, The Widow(er)’s Limit Provision of Social Security, Social Security
Administration, Office of Policy, Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics, Working Paper Series Number 92,
June 2001, http://www.socialsecurity.gov/policy/docs/workingpapers/wp92.pdf.
95 If the worker died before attaining FRA and he or she had benefits withheld under the retirement earnings test (RET),
for purposes of determining the limit on the widow(er)’s benefit, the worker’s benefit is recomputed and increased at
the time of the worker’s death to take into account months for which the worker’s benefits were partially or fully
withheld under the RET. For more information on the RET and how it affects benefits for survivors, see CRS Report
R41242, Social Security Retirement Earnings Test: How Earnings Affect Benefits, by Dawn Nuschler and Alison M.
Shelton.
96 See CRS Report RL32453, Social Security: The Government Pension Offset (GPO), by Alison M. Shelton.
97 Benefits for a divorced spouse, a surviving divorced spouse or a disabled surviving divorced spouse are not reduced
for the family maximum. Benefits for other auxiliaries and survivors are reduced for the family maximum not taking
into account the divorced beneficiary. Social Security Administration, Program Operations Manual System (POMS),
Section RS 00615.682 (Family Benefits Where a Divorced Spouse or a Surviving Divorced Spouse is Entitled),
https://secure.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx/0300615682.
Congressional Research Service
34
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Table C-1. Social Security Spousal and Widow(er)’s Benefits
Minimum Possible
Basic Benefit Amount
Benefit, Expressed as a
Before Any
Percent of the Worker’s
Basis for Entitlement
Eligibility Age
Adjustments
PIA a
Spouse
Age 62
50% of worker’s PIA
32.5% of the worker’s PIA
The worker on whose
(The figure of 32.5% is
record benefits are
found as follows. The
based must be
spousal benefit is 50% of the
receiving benefits.
worker’s PIA. A spouse
who claims benefits at age
62 and has an FRA of 67
would have his or her
spousal benefit reduced by
35%, as described in
footnote 91.
Mathematically, the
calculation is (1-.35)*0.50 of
the retired worker’s
benefit= 0.325. )
Divorced Spouse
Age 62
50% of worker’s PIA
32.5% of worker’s PIA
(if divorced individual was
Generally, the worker
(The reduction to spousal
married to the worker for at
on whose record
benefits for a divorced
least 10 years before the
benefits are based
spouse who claims benefits
divorce became final and is
must be receiving
before FRA is identical to
currently unmarried)
benefits. However, a
the reduction for a married
divorced spouse may
or separated spouse.)
receive benefits on the
worker’s record if the
worker is eligible for
(but not receiving)
benefits and the
divorce has been final
for at least 2 years.
Widowed Mothers and
No minimum age
75% of deceased worker’s
No reduction based on age
Fathers
requirement
PIA
at entitlement
Mother’s and father’s
benefits end if the
beneficiary becomes entitled
to a widow(er)’s benefit.
Widow(er) & Divorced
Age 60
100% of deceased worker’s 71.5% of deceased worker’s
Widow(er)
PIA
PIA
(if divorced individual was
(As described in footnote
married to the worker for at
93, the maximum reduction
least 10 years before the
to the survivor benefit as a
divorce became final and did
result of early entitlement is
not remarry before age 60)
28.5%. The figure of 71.5%
is found as (1-.285) * 100%
of the deceased worker’s
benefit. See also
“widow(er)’s limit
provision,” below.)
Disabled Widow(er) &
Age 50
100% of deceased worker’s 71.5% of deceased worker’s
Divorced Disabled
PIA
PIA
The qualifying disability
Congressional Research Service
35
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
Minimum Possible
Basic Benefit Amount
Benefit, Expressed as a
Before Any
Percent of the Worker’s
Basis for Entitlement
Eligibility Age
Adjustments
PIA a
Widow(er)
must have occurred:
(As described in footnote
(if divorced individual was
(1) within 7 years of
93, the maximum reduction
married to the worker for at
the worker’s death;
to the survivor benefit as a
least 10 years before the
result of early entitlement is
divorce became final and did
(2) within 7 years of
28.5%, including for
not remarry before age 50)
having been previously
divorced survivors and
entitled to benefits on
disabled survivors who claim
the worker’s record as
benefits before age 60.)
a widow(er) with a
child in his/her care; or
(3) within 7 years of
having been previously
entitled to benefits as
a disabled widow(er)
that ended because the
qualifying disability
ended (whichever is
later).a
Widow(er)’s Limit
As noted above, widow(er)’s benefits are reduced if a widow(er) claims benefits
Provision
before FRA, with a maximum age-related reduction equal to 28.5% of the deceased
worker’s PIA.
If a widow(er) claims benefits at FRA, his or her benefits are reduced if the
deceased worker (on whose record the widow(er)’s benefit is based) claimed
benefits before FRA and therefore was receiving a reduced benefit. The reduction is
based on the widow(er)’s limit provision.
Under this provision, the widow(er)’s benefit is limited to the higher of:
(1) the benefit the worker would be receiving if he or she were still alive, and
(2) 82.5% of the deceased worker’s PIA.
Stated another way, under the widow(er)’s limit provision, the maximum reduction is
17.5% of the deceased worker’s PIA (i.e., no less than 82.5% of the deceased
worker’s PIA is payable).
The widow(er)’s limit provision is intended to prevent the widow(er)’s benefit from
exceeding the deceased worker’s retirement benefit.
Social Security Handbook, Section 724.3
Note Regarding the Widow(er)’s Limit Provision and the Retirement Earnings Test:
If the worker died before reaching FRA and he or she had benefits ful y or partial y
withheld for one or more months under the Social Security retirement earnings test
(RET), for purposes of determining the limit on the widow(er)’s benefit, the deceased
worker’s benefit is recomputed and increased (at the time of his or her death) to
take into account months for which benefits were withheld under the RET. (For
more information, see CRS Report R41242, Social Security Retirement Earnings Test:
How Earnings Affect Benefits, by Dawn Nuschler and Alison M. Shelton.)
Source: Social Security Administration, Social Security Handbook, Sections 418, 420 and 724, http://www.ssa.gov/
OP_Home/handbook/handbook.html.
a. The maximum reduction shown in this column reflects two steps: (1) computation of the spouse or
widow(er) benefit as the applicable percentage (for example, 50% or 100%) of the retired or disabled
worker’s PIA,; and (2) application to the spousal or widow(er) benefit of the maximum reduction for early
entitlement, assuming the spouse or widow(er) claims benefits at the earliest possible age (ages 62 and 60,
Congressional Research Service
36
Social Security: Revisiting Benefits for Spouses and Survivors
respectively). For widowed mothers and fathers who have a qualified child in care, there is no reduction for
entitlement before the ful retirement age.
b. Benefits for disabled widow(er)s beginning at age 50 were enacted in 1967 when workers aged 50-59
needed up to seven years of covered employment to qualify for disability benefits based on their own work
record.
Congressional Research Service
37