Social Security: The Windfall Elimination
Provision (WEP)
Updated September 19, 2022
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
98-35

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

Summary
Social Security is a work-based, federal insurance program that provides cash benefits to workers
and their eligible family members in the event of the worker’s retirement, disability, or death. A
worker’s employment or self-employment is considered covered by Social Security if the services
performed in that job result in earnings that are taxable and creditable for program purposes.
Although participation in Social Security is compulsory for most workers, about 6% of all
workers in paid employment or self-employment are not covered by Social Security.
The windfall elimination provision (WEP) is a modified benefit formula that reduces the Social
Security benefits of certain retired or disabled workers who are also entitled to pension benefits
based on earnings from jobs that were not covered by Social Security and thus not subject to the
Social Security payroll tax. Its purpose is to remove an unintended advantage or “windfall” that
these workers would otherwise receive as a result of the interaction between the regular Social
Security benefit formula and the workers’ relatively short careers in Social Security-covered
employment.
In December 2021, about 2.0 million people (or about 3% of all Social Security beneficiaries)
were affected by the WEP. Those workers mainly include state and local government employees
covered by alternative staff-retirement systems as well as most permanent civilian federal
employees hired before January 1, 1984, who are covered by the Civil Service Retirement System
(CSRS).
WEP’s supporters argue that the formula is a reasonable means to prevent overgenerous payments
and unintended benefits to people who have earnings not covered by Social Security and receive
pensions from noncovered work. Opponents argue that the provision substantially reduces a
benefit that workers may have included in their retirement plans, and it reduces benefits
disproportionately for lower-earning households. Others criticize the current WEP formula as an
imprecise way to determine the actual windfall when applied to individual cases.
Recent legislation has generally proposed either to eliminate the provision for all or some affected
beneficiaries, or replace the current-law provision with a new proportional formula based on past
earnings from both covered and noncovered employment.
Congressional Research Service

link to page 18 Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

Contacts
Author Information ........................................................................................................................ 14

Congressional Research Service

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

Introduction
Social Security provides insured workers and their eligible family members with a measure of
protection against the loss of income due to the worker’s retirement, disability, or death. The
amount of the monthly benefit payable to workers and their family members is based on the
worker’s career-average earnings from jobs covered by Social Security (i.e., jobs in which the
worker’s earnings were subject to the Social Security payroll tax).1 The Social Security benefit
formula is weighted to replace a greater share of career-average earnings for low-paid workers
than for high-paid workers. This means that low-paid workers receive relatively high benefits in
relation to their payroll tax contributions, although the dollar amount of their benefits is lower
than that provided to high-paid workers.
The benefit formula, however, cannot distinguish between workers who have low career-average
earnings because they worked for many years at low earnings in Social Security-covered
employment and workers who appear to have low career-average earnings because they worked
for many years in jobs not covered by Social Security. (Those years show up as zeros in their
Social Security earnings records, which, when averaged, lower their career earnings from covered
work.) Consequently, workers who split their careers between covered and noncovered
employment—even highly paid ones—may also receive the advantage of the weighted formula.
The windfall elimination provision (WEP) is a modified benefit formula designed to remove the
unintended advantage, or “windfall,” of the regular benefit formula for certain retired or disabled
workers who spent less than full careers in covered employment and who are also entitled to
pension benefits based on earnings from jobs not covered by Social Security. The reduction in
initial benefits caused by the WEP is designed to place affected workers in approximately the
same position they would have been in had all their earnings been covered by Social Security.
Background on the Social Security Benefit Formula
Workers qualify for Social Security benefits if they worked and paid Social Security payroll taxes
for a sufficient amount of time in covered employment.2 Retired workers need at least 40 earnings
credits (or about 10 years of covered work), whereas disabled workers generally need fewer
earnings credits.3 Initial benefits are based on a worker’s career-average earnings from jobs
covered by Social Security. In computing the initial benefit amount, a worker’s annual taxable
earnings are indexed (i.e., adjusted) to average wage growth in the national economy.4 This is
done to bring earlier years of earnings up to a comparable, current basis. Next, a summarized
measure of a worker’s career-average earnings is found by totaling the highest 35 years of

1 For the purposes of this report, the term payroll tax includes the Social Security self-employment tax.
2 Unless otherwise noted, the term covered employment includes self-employment covered by Social Security.
3 A worker may earn up to four earnings credits per calendar year. In 2022, a worker earns one credit for each $1,510 of
covered earnings, up to a maximum of four credits for covered earnings of $6,040 or more. Earnings credits are also
called quarters of coverage. See Social Security Administration (SSA), How You Earn Credits, Publication No. 05-
10022, 2022, https://best.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10072.pdf.
4 Years of earnings are indexed up to the second calendar year before the year of earliest eligibility (i.e., the year in
which the worker first attains aged 62, becomes disabled, or dies). Years of earnings after the last indexing year are
counted in nominal (i.e., unadjusted) dollars.
Congressional Research Service

1

link to page 6 Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

covered earnings and then dividing by 35.5 After that, a monthly average, known as average
indexed monthly earnings (AIME), is found by dividing the annual average by 12.
Once the worker’s AIME has been derived, it is then entered into the Social Security benefit
formula to produce the worker’s initial benefit amount. The benefit formula is progressive,
replacing a greater share of career-average earnings for low-paid workers than for high-paid
workers. The benefit formula applies three factors—90%, 32%, and 15%—to three different
levels, or brackets, of AIME. The result is known as the primary insurance amount (PIA) and is
rounded down to the nearest 10 cents. The PIA is the worker’s basic benefit before any
adjustments are applied.6 The benefit formula applicable to a given worker is based on the
individual’s earliest eligibility year (ELY), that is, the year in which the worker first attains age
62, becomes disabled, or dies.7 For workers whose ELY is 2022, the PIA is determined as follows
in Table 1.
Table 1. Social Security Benefit Formula for
Workers Who First Become Eligible in 2022
Factor
Average Indexed Monthly Earnings (AIME)
90%
of the first $1,024, plus
32%
of AIME over $1,024 and through $6,172 (if any), plus
15%
of AIME over $6,172 (if any)
Source: CRS, based on Social Security Administration (SSA), Office of the Chief Actuary (OCACT), “Benefit
Formula Bend Points,” https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/bendpoints.html.
The averaging provision in the benefit formula tends to cause workers with short careers in Social
Security-covered employment to have low AIMEs, even if they had high earnings in their
noncovered career. This results in these workers having AIMEs that are similar to those of people
who worked for low earnings in covered employment throughout their careers. This is because
years of zero covered earnings are entered as zeros into the formula that averages the worker’s
earnings history over 35 years. For example, a person with 10 years in Social Security-covered
employment would have an AIME that reflects 25 years of zero earnings, even if that person
worked for 25 years in a high-paying, noncovered career.
Consequently, for a worker whose AIME is low because his or her career was split between
covered and noncovered employment, the benefit formula replaces more of covered earnings at
the 90% rate than if the worker had spent a full 35-year career in covered employment at the same
earnings level. The higher replacement rate8 for workers who have split their careers between
Social Security-covered and noncovered jobs is sometimes referred to as a “windfall.”9

5 The number of benefit computation years for disabled or deceased workers may be fewer than 35 years.
6 The worker’s primary insurance amount (PIA) is subsequently adjusted to account for inflation through cost-of-living
adjustments (COLAs). Additional adjustments may be made to the PIA to account for early retirement, delayed
retirement, or certain other factors.
7 Although the factors in the formula are fixed in law, the dollar amounts defining the brackets, also known as bend
points, are adjusted annually for average earnings growth in the national economy. Because the bend points change
each year, the benefit formula for a worker with an earliest eligibility year (ELY) in 2022 is different from the benefit
formula for a worker with an ELY in any other year. For bend point amount for years prior to 2022, see SSA, Office of
the Chief Actuary (OCACT), “Benefit Formula Bend Points,” https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/bendpoints.html.
8 The replacement rate is the ratio of the program benefit to a worker’s prior earnings.
9 The windfall elimination provision (WEP) is sometimes confused with the government pension offset (GPO), which
Congressional Research Service

2

link to page 7 link to page 7 Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

How the Windfall Elimination Provision Works
A different Social Security benefit formula, known informally as the windfall elimination
provision, applies to certain workers who are entitled to Social Security benefits as well as to
pension benefits from employment not covered by Social Security.10 Under the WEP, the 90%
factor in the first bracket of the formula is reduced to as low as 40%. The effect is to lower the
proportion of earnings in the first bracket that are converted to benefits. Table 2 illustrates how
the regular benefit formula and the WEP work in 2022 for someone with a 40% factor.
Table 2. Hypothetical Scenario: PIA for a Worker with AIME of $1,500 Who
Becomes Eligible in 2022 and Has 20 Years of Substantial Coverage
Regular Formula
WEP Formula
90% of first $1,024
$921.60 40% of first $1,024
$409.60
32% of earnings over $1,024
152.32 32% of earnings over $1,024
152.32
and through $6,172
and through $6,172
15% over $6,172
0.00 15% over $6,172
0.00
Total after rounding
$1,073.90 Total after rounding
$561.90
Source: CRS.
Note: PIA = Primary Insurance Amount. AIME = Average Indexed Monthly Earnings. By law, the PIA is rounded
down to nearest 10 cents.
In this scenario, the monthly benefit is $512.00 lower under the WEP than under the regular
benefit formula ($1,073.90 minus $561.90). Note that the WEP reduction is limited to the first
bracket in the AIME formula (90% vs. 40%), while the 32% and 15% factors for the second and
third brackets are unchanged. As a result, for AIME amounts that exceed the first formula
threshold of $1,024, the WEP reduction remains a flat $512 per month. For example, if the
worker had an AIME of $4,000 instead of $1,500, the WEP reduction would still be $512 per
month. The WEP therefore causes a proportionally larger reduction in benefits for workers with
lower AIMEs and monthly benefit amounts.11
A guarantee in the WEP ensures that the WEP reduction cannot exceed half of the noncovered
pension based on the worker’s noncovered work. This guarantee is designed to help protect
workers with low pensions from noncovered work. The WEP does not apply to workers who have
30 or more years of substantial employment covered under Social Security, with an adjusted

reduces Social Security benefits paid to spouses and widow(er)s of insured workers if the spouse or widow(er) also
receives a pension based on government employment not covered by Social Security. See CRS Report RL32453, Social
Security: The Government Pension Offset (GPO).
10 Section 215(a)(7) and (d)(3) of the Social Security Act; 42 U.S.C. §415(a)(7) and (d)(3). See also 20 C.F.R.
§§404.213 and 404.243. Moreover, see SSA, Program Operations Manual System, “RS 00605.360 WEP
Applicability,” June 24, 2013, https://secure.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx/0300605360. The term windfall elimination
provision is not specified in statute or in SSA’s regulations.
11 For the worker shown in Table 2, with an AIME of $1,500 and a monthly benefit of $1,073.90 under the regular
benefit formula in 2022, the WEP reduction of $512.00 represents a cut of approximately 48% to the regular formula
monthly benefit amount. By comparison, a worker with an AIME of $4,000 would be entitled to a PIA of $1,873.90
under the 2021 regular benefit formula, and the same WEP reduction of $512.00 per month would represent a 27%
reduction in this worker’s monthly benefit amount.
Congressional Research Service

3

link to page 8 link to page 8 link to page 8 Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

formula for workers with 21 to 29 years of substantial covered employment, as shown in Table
3.12
Table 3. Maximum WEP Reduction for Workers Who Become Eligible in 2022, by
Years of Substantial Coverage
Years of Social Security Coverage
20 or

fewer
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30+
First factor in formula:

40%
45%
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
Maximum dollar amount of monthly WEP reduction for workers who first become eligible for Social Security in
2022a ($):

512.0
460.8
409.6
358.4
307.2
256.0
204.8
153.6
102.4
51.2
0.0
Source: CRS analysis.
Notes: The WEP reduction may be lower than the amount shown because the reduction is limited to one-half
of the worker’s pension from noncovered employment. In addition, because the WEP reduces the initial benefit
amount before it is reduced or increased due to early retirement, delayed retirement credits (DRCs), cost-of-
living adjustments (COLAs), or other factors, the difference between the final benefit with the WEP and the final
benefit without the WEP may be less than or greater than the amounts shown.
a. The maximum dollar amount of the monthly WEP reduction is based on a worker’s ELY. Because the dollar
amounts defining the brackets in the benefit formula change each year, the maximum dollar amount of the
WEP reduction for a worker with an ELY of 2022 is different from the maximum deduction for a worker
with an ELY of any other year. For maximum WEP reduction amounts for workers with ELYs prior to
2022, see SSA, “Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) Chart,” https://www.ssa.gov/planners/retire/wep-
chart.html.
Types of Workers Affected by the WEP
The WEP applies to benefits payable to retired or disabled workers who meet the criteria above
and to their eligible dependents; however, it does not apply to benefits payable to survivors of
deceased insured workers. Groups of workers likely to be affected by the WEP include certain
state and local government employees who are covered by alternative pension plans through their
employers13 and most permanent civilian federal employees hired before January 1, 1984, who
are covered by the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS).14 The WEP does not apply to

12 For determining years of coverage after 1978 for individuals with pensions from noncovered employment,
“substantial coverage” is defined as 25% of the “old law” Social Security maximum taxable earnings base for each year
in question. The old law maximum taxable earnings base refers to the earnings base that would have been in effect had
the Social Security Amendments of 1977 (P.L. 95-216) not been enacted. In 2021, the old-law taxable earnings base is
equal to $106,200; therefore, to earn credit for one year of substantial employment under the WEP, a worker would
have to earn at least $26,550 in Social Security-covered employment. For the thresholds for previous years, see SSA,
OCACT, “Old-Law Base and Year of Coverage,” https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/yoc.html.
13 See Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Federal-State Reference Guide, IRS Publication
963 (Rev. 7-2020), https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p963.pdf.
14 See CRS Report 98-810, Federal Employees’ Retirement System: Benefits and Financing.
Congressional Research Service

4

link to page 9 link to page 11 Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

 federal employees performing service on January 1, 1984, to which coverage was
extended on that date by reason of the Social Security Amendments of 1983 (P.L.
98-21);
 employees of a nonprofit organization who were exempt from Social Security
coverage on December 31, 1983, and who became covered for the first time on
January 1, 1984, under P.L. 98-21;
 workers who attained age 62, became disabled, or were first eligible for a
pension from noncovered employment before 1986;
 workers who receive foreign pension payments after 1994 that are based on a
totalization agreement with the United States;15
 workers whose only noncovered pension is based on earnings from noncovered
domestic or foreign employment before 1957;16 and
 railroad workers whose only noncovered pension is based on earnings from
employment covered by the Railroad Retirement Act.17
The Number of People Affected by the WEP
According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), as of December 2021, about 2.0 million
Social Security beneficiaries were affected by the WEP (Table 4). The overwhelming majority of
those affected (about 95%) were retired workers. Approximately 3% of all Social Security
beneficiaries (including disabled workers and dependent beneficiaries) and 4% of all retired-
worker beneficiaries were affected by the WEP in December 2021.18 Of retired workers affected
by the WEP, approximately 55% were men (Table 5).
Table 4. Number of Social Security Beneficiaries in Current Payment Status with
Benefits Affected by WEP, by State and Type of Beneficiary: December 2021

Type of Beneficiary
Retired
Disabled
Spouses and
State
Total
Workers
Workers
Children
Total
1,971,102
1,863,933
12,245
94,924
Alabama
17,831
16,849
157
825
Alaska
12,907
12,402
63
442
Arizona
38,573
36,692
202
1,679
Arkansas
10,652
10,184
105
363
California
276,358
262,076
1,616
12,666
Colorado
70,611
67,665
803
2,143
Connecticut
21,094
20,383
97
614

15 Totalization agreements are bilateral agreements that provide limited coordination of the U.S. Social Security
program with comparable social insurance programs of other countries. The agreements are intended primarily to
eliminate dual Social Security taxation based on the same work and provide benefit protection for workers who divide
their careers between the United States and a foreign country.
16 The WEP does not apply in cases where the pension is based, in part, on noncovered military reserve duty before
1988 but after 1956.
17 SSA, POMS, “RS 00605.362 Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) Exceptions,” November 1, 2019,
https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0300605362.
18 Data on the total Social Security beneficiary and retired-worker populations used in these calculations are from SSA,
OCACT, “Benefits Paid By Type Of Beneficiary,” https://www.ssa.gov/oact/ProgData/icp.html.
Congressional Research Service

5

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

Type of Beneficiary
Retired
Disabled
Spouses and
State
Total
Workers
Workers
Children
Delaware
4,562
4,384
31
147
District of Columbia
7,114
6,923
42
149
Florida
108,272
102,507
561
5,204
Georgia
56,893
54,803
360
1,730
Hawaii
11,626
10,922
40
664
Idaho
9,425
8,938
58
429
Illinois
99,946
96,375
373
3,198
Indiana
17,767
16,911
134
722
Iowa
8,315
8,003
60
252
Kansas
9,480
9,084
69
327
Kentucky
25,292
24,365
180
747
Louisiana
49,787
47,264
577
1,946
Maine
19,935
19,318
79
538
Maryland
46,498
44,566
223
1,709
Massachusetts
85,431
82,572
567
2,292
Michigan
22,645
21,437
179
1,029
Minnesota
16,484
15,894
74
516
Mississippi
9,571
9,120
78
373
Missouri
41,134
39,972
226
936
Montana
6,598
6,289
33
276
Nebraska
5,657
5,421
40
196
Nevada
36,716
35,425
222
1,069
New Hampshire
9,097
8,719
79
299
New Jersey
22,767
21,368
187
1,212
New Mexico
13,978
13,174
116
688
New York
32,400
30,289
222
1,889
North Carolina
31,636
30,269
182
1,185
North Dakota
2,302
2,212
8
82
Ohio
156,412
150,313
1,372
4,727
Oklahoma
17,254
16,443
135
676
Oregon
18,659
17,802
76
781
Pennsylvania
36,141
34,288
261
1,592
Rhode Island
6,130
5,928
48
154
South Carolina
19,429
18,584
104
741
South Dakota
3,970
3,836
18
116
Tennessee
22,298
21,287
144
867
Texas
200,309
191,331
1,145
7,833
Utah
14,298
13,379
79
840
Vermont
2,704
2,574
8
122
Virginia
47,723
45,358
127
2,238
Washington
34,905
32,804
157
1,944
Congressional Research Service

6

link to page 17 link to page 17 Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

Type of Beneficiary
Retired
Disabled
Spouses and
State
Total
Workers
Workers
Children
West Virginia
6,246
5,854
61
331
Wisconsin
12,686
12,184
56
446
Wyoming
2,673
2,565
22
86
Outlying Areas and
109,911
86,628
389
22,894
Foreign Countries
Source: CRS, based on unpublished data from Social Security Administration (SSA), Office of Research,
Evaluation, and Statistics (ORES), Table B, February 2022.
Table 5. Number of Social Security Worker Beneficiaries in Current Payment Status
with Benefits Affected by WEP, by Gender and Type of Beneficiary, December 2021
Disabled
Gender
All Workers
Retired Workers
Workers
All
1,876,178
1,863,933
12,245
Beneficiaries
Women
844,958
839,013
5,945
Men
1,031,220
1,024,920
6,300
Source: CRS, based on unpublished data from SSA, ORES, Table W01, February 2022.
For data on the share of Social Security beneficiaries affected by the WEP in December 2021, by
state, see Table A-1 in the Appendix.
Legislative History and Rationale
The WEP was enacted in 1983 as part of major amendments (P.L. 98-21) designed to shore up the
financing of the Social Security program. The 40% WEP formula factor was the result of a
compromise between a House bill that would have substituted a 61% factor for the regular 90%
factor and a Senate proposal that would have substituted a 32% factor.19
The purpose of the 1983 provision was to remove an unintended advantage that the regular Social
Security benefit formula provided to certain retired or disabled worker-beneficiaries who were
also entitled to pension benefits based on earnings from jobs not subject to the Social Security
payroll tax. The regular formula was intended to help workers who spent their lifetimes in low-
paying jobs, by providing them with a benefit that replaces a higher proportion of their career-
average earnings than the benefit provided to workers with high career-average earnings.
However, the formula does not differentiate between those who worked in low-paid jobs
throughout their careers and other workers who appear to have been low paid because they
worked many years in jobs not covered by Social Security and few years in covered jobs. Under
the old law, workers who were employed for only a portion of their careers in jobs covered by
Social Security—even highly paid ones—also received the advantage of the weighted formula,
because their few years of covered earnings were averaged over their entire working career to
determine the average covered earnings on which their Social Security benefits were based. The

19 U.S. Congress, Committee of Conference, Social Security Amendments of 1983, conference report to accompany
H.R. 1900, 98th Cong., 1st sess., March 24, 1983, H.Rept. 98-47 (Washington: GPO, 1983), pp. 120-121,
http://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Conf-98-47.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

7

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

WEP is intended to place affected workers in approximately the same position they would have
been in had all their earnings been covered by Social Security.
Arguments for the WEP
Proponents of the measure say that it is a reasonable means to prevent payment of overgenerous
and unintended benefits to certain workers who otherwise would profit from happenstance (i.e.,
the mechanics of the Social Security benefit formula). Furthermore, they maintain that the
provision rarely causes hardship because by and large the people affected are reasonably well off
because by definition they also receive pensions from noncovered work. The guarantee provision
ensures that the reduction in Social Security benefits cannot exceed half of the pension from
noncovered work, which protects people with small pensions from noncovered work. In addition,
the impact of the WEP is reduced for workers who spend 21 to 29 years in Social Security-
covered work and is eliminated for people who spend 30 years or more in Social Security-
covered work.
Arguments Against the WEP
Some opponents of the WEP believe the provision is unfair because it substantially reduces a
benefit that certain workers may have included in their retirement plans. Others criticize how the
provision works. They say the arbitrary 40% factor in the windfall elimination formula is an
imprecise way to determine the actual windfall when applied to individual cases.20
The WEP’s Impact on Low-Income Workers
The impact of the WEP on low-income workers has been the subject of debate. Jeffrey Brown
and Scott Weisbenner (hereinafter “Brown and Weisbenner”) point out two reasons why the WEP
can be regressive.21 First, because the WEP adjustment is confined to the first bracket of career-
average earnings in the benefit formula ($996 in 2021), it causes a proportionally larger reduction
in benefits for workers with lower AIMEs and benefit amounts than for others. Second, a high
earner is more likely than a low earner to cross the “substantial work” threshold for accumulating
years of covered earnings (in 2021 this threshold is $26,550 in Social Security-covered earnings);
therefore, high earners are more likely to benefit from the provision that phases out the WEP for
people with between 21 and 29 years of covered employment.
Brown and Weisbenner found that the WEP does reduce benefits disproportionately for lower-
earning households.22 For some high-income households, applying the WEP to covered earnings
even provides a higher replacement rate than if the WEP were applied proportionately to all
earnings, covered and noncovered. Brown and Weisbenner found that the WEP can also lead to
large changes in Social Security replacement rates based on small changes in covered earnings,
particularly when a small increase in covered earnings carries a person over the threshold for an

20 See, for example, the Social Security Advisory Board, The Windfall Elimination Provision: It’s Time to Correct the
Math, October 1, 2015, http://www.ssab.gov/Portals/0/OUR_WORK/REPORTS/WEP_Position_Paper_2015.pdf.
21 Jeffrey R. Brown and Scott Weisbenner, “The Distributional Effects of the Social Security Windfall Elimination
Provision,” Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, vol. 12, iss. 04 (October 2013), pp. 415-434,
http://business.illinois.edu/weisbenn/RESEARCH/PAPERS/JPEF_Brown_Weisbenner.pdf.
22 For more information, see CRS Report R46194, The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) in Social Security:
Comparing Current Law with Proposed Proportional Formulas.
Congressional Research Service

8

link to page 13 link to page 13

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

additional year of substantial covered earnings, leading to an adjustment in the WEP formula
applied to the AIME.
Noncovered Pensions for Beneficiaries Affected by
the WEP
The WEP applies to Social Security beneficiaries who are entitled to (i.e., receiving) a pension
based on earnings that were not covered by Social Security. SSA periodically provides data on
those noncovered pension amounts for Social Security beneficiaries affected by the WEP. Figure
1 shows the distribution of Social Security WEP-affected beneficiaries who first became eligible
for benefits in 2018, by noncovered pension amount and gender. As of December 2021, about
21% of those beneficiaries received a noncovered pension amount of less than $1,000 per month,
approximately 50% received a monthly amount between $1,000 and $3,999, and 29% received a
monthly amount of $4,000 or more. Among those WEP-affected beneficiaries, women tended to
have a lower noncovered pension amount than men on average.
Figure 1. Distribution of WEP-Affected Social Security Beneficiaries by Monthly
Noncovered Pension Amount and Gender, December 2021
Among Social Security beneficiaries with first eligibility in 2018

Source: CRS, based on unpublished data from SSA’s ORES, Table W12, February 2022.
Notes: Data reflects beneficiaries for whom noncovered pension amounts are available. The monthly pension
amount represents the noncovered government pension amount at the time of initial filing for Social Security
benefits.
A worker who split his or her career between Social Security-covered and noncovered jobs may
receive both Social Security retired-worker benefits (subject to the WEP) and a noncovered
pension. In December 2021, among all Social Security worker beneficiaries who were affected by
the WEP, about 82% had 20 or fewer YOCs (substantial covered earnings under Social
Security).23 Usually, the longer the individual worked in noncovered employment, the shorter the
employment in covered jobs (provided that the number of working years a person can work is

23 CRS, based on unpublished data from Social Security Administration (SSA), Office of Research, Evaluation, and
Statistics (ORES), Tables W01 and W06, February 2022.
Congressional Research Service

9

link to page 14

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

relatively stable). In this case, the worker would be likely to receive a relatively larger
noncovered pension amount and a smaller Social Security benefit. In December 2021, among
WEP-affected beneficiaries who first became eligible for Social Security in 2018, about 35% of
them received a monthly noncovered pension amount of $2,000 or more and a monthly Social
Security benefit below $600 after the effect of the WEP (see Figure 2).
However, some workers may work a relatively short career or at relatively low earnings in both
Social Security-covered and noncovered jobs, thus resulting in relatively low combined Social
Security and noncovered pension benefits. In December 2021, among WEP-affected beneficiaries
who became eligible for Social Security in 2018, about 11% of those beneficiaries received less
than $1,000 per month in noncovered pensions and less than $900 per month in Social Security
benefits (for a combined total below $1,900 per month). Another 8% received between $1,000-
1,999 per month in noncovered pensions and less than $600 per month in Social Security (for a
combined total greater than $1,000 and below $2,599 per month). This monthly benefit amount
does not include retirement income received from other sources (such as need-based benefits and
other government transfers, earnings, retirement savings, and asset income).
Figure 2. Distribution of WEP-Affected Social Security Beneficiaries by Monthly
Noncovered Pension Amount and Monthly Social Security Benefits, December 2021
Among Social Security beneficiaries with first eligibility in 2018

Source: CRS, based on unpublished data from SSA’s ORES, Table W16, February 2022.
Notes: Data reflects beneficiaries for whom noncovered pension amounts are available. The monthly pension
amount represents the noncovered government pension amount at the time of initial filing. Social Security
benefits are measured by the primary insurance amount after the effect of the WEP.
Legislative Activity on the WEP in the
117th Congress
In the 117h Congress, several proposals have been introduced that would repeal, replace, or
amend the WEP. These proposals are briefly described below.
The Social Security Fairness Act of 2021 was introduced by Representative Rodney Davis on
January 4, 2021 (H.R. 82), and the Social Security Fairness Act was introduced by Senator
Sherrod Brown on April 22, 2021 (S. 1302). The legislation would repeal the WEP and the
Congressional Research Service

10

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

government pension offset (GPO), which reduces the Social Security benefits paid to spouses and
widow(er)s of insured workers if the spouse or widow(er) also receives a pension based on
government employment not covered by Social Security.24 The elimination of the WEP and GPO
would apply to benefits payable for months after December 2021. SSA’s Office of the Chief
Actuary (OCACT) projected that the legislation would increase program costs by $146 billion
over the period including 2022-2031. The estimates also show that the bill would reduce the long-
range actuarial balance (i.e., increase the net long-term cost) of the combined Social Security trust
funds by 0.12% of taxable payroll and would change the projected year of reserve depletion for
the combined Social Security trust funds from 2035 under current law to 2034 under the
proposal.25
The bills titled Social Security 2100: A Sacred Trust were introduced by Representative John B.
Larson (H.R. 5723) and Senator Richard Blumenthal (S. 3071), respectively, on October 26,
2021. Among other provisions, the bills would repeal the WEP and the GPO for benefits payable
during 2022-2026. OCACT estimated that enactment of this provision alone would increase the
net long-term cost by 0.01% of taxable payroll.26
Since 2004, introduced legislation has reflected a different approach that would replace the WEP
formula under current law with a new proportional formula for new beneficiaries. Under this
approach, the proportional formula would apply the regular Social Security benefit formula to all
past earnings from covered and noncovered employment. The resulting benefit would then be
reduced by the ratio of career-average earnings from covered employment to career-average
earnings from both covered and noncovered employment (i.e., combined earnings). Based on the
estimate from OCACT, among all current beneficiaries in 2018, about 69% of those affected by
the WEP would receive an increase in Social Security benefits using the proportional formula,
and the remaining 31% would receive a lower benefit. In addition, 13.5 million beneficiaries who
are not affected by the current WEP would receive a lower benefit using the proportional
formula.27 Most workers who are not affected by the current WEP but would be affected by the
proportional formula are those with noncovered employment who have 30 or more years of
substantial covered earnings, or those with noncovered employment who are not receiving
noncovered pension benefits; both groups are exempt from the WEP under current law. To protect
future beneficiaries from further benefit reduction compared with the current law, the recent
legislation based on the proportional formula would generally attempt to hold beneficiaries
harmless to a certain degree by providing the higher benefit of the current-law WEP or the
proportional formula. This approach was reflected in the Public Servants Protection and Fairness
Act of 2021 (H.R. 2337) and the Equal Treatment of Public Servants Act of 2021 (H.R. 5834), as
described below in this section.

24 See CRS Report RL32453, Social Security: The Government Pension Offset (GPO). See also CRS In Focus IF10203,
Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO).
25 Letter from Stephen C. Goss, Chief Actuary, SSA, to the Honorable Rodney Davis and the Honorable Abigail
Spanberger, U.S. House of Representatives, July 20, 2022, https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/
DavisSpanberger_20220720.pdf. The projection was based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2022 Social Security
trustees report. Taxable payroll is the total amount of earnings in the economy that is subject to Social Security payroll
and self-employment taxes (with some adjustments).
26 Letter from Stephen C. Goss, Chief Actuary, SSA, to the Honorable John Larson, U.S. House of Representatives,
October 26, 2021, https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/JLarson_20211026.pdf. The projection was based on the
intermediate assumptions of the 2021 Social Security trustees report.
27 Letter from Stephen C. Goss, Chief Actuary, SSA, to the Honorable Kevin Brady, U.S. House, July 24, 2019,
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/solvency/KBrady_20190724.pdf. The projections are based on the intermediate assumptions
of the 2019 Social Security trustees report.
Congressional Research Service

11

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

The Public Servants Protection and Fairness Act of 2021 (H.R. 2337) was introduced by
Representative Richard E. Neal on April 1, 2021. The legislation would replace the WEP with a
new proportional formula for individuals who become eligible for Social Security benefits in
2023 or later. The bill includes a benefit guarantee provision that would allow individuals to
receive the higher of their benefit under the current-law WEP or the proportional formula. The
proposal would also provide a rebate payment starting nine months after enactment for retired-
worker and disabled-worker beneficiaries affected by the current WEP (up to $150 per month);
the rebate payments would increase with cost-of-living adjustments. In 2021, OCACT estimated
that the legislation would increase program expenditures by about $30.6 billion (mainly from the
rebate) between 2021 and 2030. The change in net cash flow of $29.0 billion (net of the revenue
from income taxation on benefits) would be reimbursed from the General Fund of the U.S.
Treasury. In the long run (75 years), the projected program cost would increase by an amount
equal to 0.02% of taxable payroll, and the projected program income would increase by the same
amount with transfers from the General Fund, thus having no significant effect on the combined
trust funds’ actuarial balance.28
The Equal Treatment of Public Servants Act of 2021 (H.R. 5834) was introduced by
Representative Kevin Brady on November 3, 2021. Similar to H.R. 2337, the legislation would
replace the WEP with the new proportional formula for individuals who become eligible for
Social Security benefits in 2023 or later. Individuals becoming eligible during the transitional
period between 2023 and 2061 would receive the higher of their benefit under the current-law
WEP or the proportional formula. For those who become eligible in 2062 and later, benefits
would be based solely on the proportional formula. The proposal would also provide a rebate
payment starting nine months after enactment for workers (up to $100 per month) and their
dependents (up to $50 per month) affected by the current WEP. The rebate payments would
increase with cost-of-living adjustments. In 2021, OCACT estimated that the legislation would
increase program costs by about $27.7 billion (or $26.3 billion net of the revenue from the
income taxation on benefits) over the period 2022 through 2031. According to OCACT’s
estimates, over the 75-year projection period, future savings from the proportional formula would
offset the cost of the monthly rebate payments and the protection provision during the transitional
period, so the bill would have no significant effect on Social Security’s long-term financial
outlook.29
The Wellbeing for Every Public Servant Act of 2021 (H.R. 4788) was introduced by
Representative Julia Letlow on July 29, 2021. Under the legislation, individuals whose combined
monthly benefits from Social Security and noncovered public pensions are below a wage-indexed
amount of $5,500 would be exempt from the WEP. Beneficiaries whose combined monthly
benefits from Social Security and noncovered public pensions are between $5,500 and $6,333
would be subject to a partial WEP reduction. The legislation would apply to benefits payable for
months after the enactment of this act.

28 Letter from Stephen C. Goss, Chief Actuary, SSA, to the Honorable Richard Neal, U.S. House, April 1, 2021,
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/solvency/RNeal_20210401.pdf. The estimates are based on the updated baseline of the 2020
Social Security trustees report intermediate projections, reflecting pandemic and recession effects, available at
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/solvency/UpdatedBaseline_20201124.pdf.
29 Letter from Stephen C. Goss, Chief Actuary, SSA, to the Honorable Kevin Brady, U.S. House, November 3, 2021,
https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/KBrady_20211103.pdf. The estimates are based on the intermediate assumptions
of the 2021 Social Security trustees report.
Congressional Research Service

12

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

Appendix. WEP-Affected Beneficiaries, by State
Table A-1. Percentage of Social Security Beneficiaries in Current Payment Status
Affected by the WEP, by State and Type of Beneficiary, December 2021

Type of Beneficiary
Retired
Disabled
Spouses and
State
All Beneficiaries
Workers
Workers
Children
Total
3.0%
3.9%
0.2%
2.3%
Alabama
1.5%
2.2%
0.1%
1.1%
Alaska
11.7%
15.2%
0.6%
6.3%
Arizona
2.7%
3.3%
0.1%
2.0%
Arkansas
1.5%
2.2%
0.1%
0.8%
California
4.5%
5.7%
0.3%
2.8%
Colorado
7.6%
9.5%
0.9%
4.0%
Connecticut
3.0%
3.8%
0.1%
1.6%
Delaware
2.0%
2.5%
0.1%
1.4%
District of Columbia
8.5%
11.5%
0.3%
3.8%
Florida
2.2%
2.8%
0.1%
1.9%
Georgia
3.0%
4.0%
0.1%
1.5%
Hawaii
4.1%
4.7%
0.2%
4.2%
Idaho
2.5%
3.2%
0.1%
1.8%
Illinois
4.4%
5.7%
0.1%
2.3%
Indiana
1.3%
1.7%
0.1%
0.9%
Iowa
1.2%
1.6%
0.1%
0.7%
Kansas
1.7%
2.1%
0.1%
1.0%
Kentucky
2.5%
3.8%
0.1%
1.1%
Louisiana
5.4%
8.1%
0.4%
2.6%
Maine
5.6%
7.5%
0.2%
2.5%
Maryland
4.5%
5.7%
0.2%
3.0%
Massachusetts
6.6%
8.8%
0.3%
2.8%
Michigan
1.0%
1.3%
0.1%
0.7%
Minnesota
1.5%
1.9%
0.1%
0.9%
Mississippi
1.4%
2.0%
0.1%
0.8%
Missouri
3.1%
4.3%
0.1%
1.3%
Montana
2.7%
3.3%
0.1%
2.1%
Nebraska
1.6%
2.0%
0.1%
1.0%
Nevada
6.4%
8.1%
0.4%
3.6%
New Hampshire
2.8%
3.7%
0.2%
1.5%
New Jersey
1.4%
1.7%
0.1%
1.2%
New Mexico
3.1%
4.0%
0.2%
2.4%
New York
0.9%
1.1%
0.0%
0.7%
North Carolina
1.4%
1.9%
0.1%
1.1%
North Dakota
1.6%
2.1%
0.1%
1.1%
Congressional Research Service

13

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

Type of Beneficiary
Retired
Disabled
Spouses and
State
All Beneficiaries
Workers
Workers
Children
Ohio
6.5%
8.9%
0.4%
3.2%
Oklahoma
2.1%
2.9%
0.1%
1.4%
Oregon
2.1%
2.6%
0.1%
1.6%
Pennsylvania
1.3%
1.6%
0.1%
1.0%
Rhode Island
2.7%
3.5%
0.1%
1.2%
South Carolina
1.6%
2.1%
0.1%
1.2%
South Dakota
2.1%
2.6%
0.1%
1.3%
Tennessee
1.5%
2.0%
0.1%
1.0%
Texas
4.5%
6.1%
0.2%
2.3%
Utah
3.3%
4.2%
0.2%
2.5%
Vermont
1.7%
2.2%
0.0%
1.3%
Virginia
3.0%
3.9%
0.1%
2.4%
Washington
2.5%
3.1%
0.1%
2.2%
West Virginia
1.3%
1.9%
0.1%
0.8%
Wisconsin
1.0%
1.2%
0.0%
0.7%
Wyoming
2.2%
2.8%
0.2%
1.4%
Outlying Areas and
Foreign Countries
7.0%
8.9%
0.3%
10.0%
Source: CRS analysis of data from the following sources: SSA, ORES, Table B, February 2022 (unpublished); and
SSA, ORES, Annual Statistical Supplement, 2022 (in progress), Table 5.J2, https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/
statcomps/supplement/2022/5j.html#table5.j2.
Notes: The column “All Beneficiaries” includes survivor beneficiaries who are not subject to the WEP. The row
“Outlying Areas and Foreign Countries” includes a small number of Social Security beneficiaries whose state or
area is unknown.

Author Information

Zhe Li

Analyst in Social Policy

Acknowledgments
This report was previously authored by multiple former CRS analysts. SSA’s Office of Research,
Evaluation, and Statistics provided unpublished data on beneficiaries affected by the WEP. CRS Research
Assistant Paul Romero assisted in updating the report.
Congressional Research Service

14

Social Security: The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
98-35 · VERSION 57 · UPDATED
15