How the 2025 Social Security Reforms Will Impact Retirees with Chase Reardon – Ep 081

The most recent changes to Social Security have left many Americans with questions—and for good reason. A landmark bipartisan bill has repealed the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and Government Pension Offset (GPO), placing more money into the pockets of retirees across the country. But what do these changes really mean for retirees?

In this episode, SHP Financial’s co-founder Matthew Peck is joined by Chase Reardon to unpack the impact of these legislative changes. Chase has helped hundreds of clients navigate the complexities of Social Security—and today, he’s breaking down the WEP and GPO repeal, who it affects, and what actions (if any) need to be taken.

In this conversation, you’ll learn how repealing the WEP and GPO affects both individual and spousal benefits, who may now be eligible for payments when they were previously denied, and what to do if you suspect you’re impacted. They’ll also touch on the broader retirement income strategy, including the pros and cons of working past retirement age, and how Social Security fits into your withdrawal plan.

In this podcast interview, you’ll learn:

• What the WEP and GPO provisions were and why they were repealed in 2025.
• Who benefits from the repeal and how payments are being issued.
• What actions spouses may need to take to receive additional benefits.
• Why the timing of your Social Security claim can significantly impact your income.
• How to use breakeven analysis to make a confident, data-backed filing decision.

Inspiring Quotes

• “The main goal with the GPO is that now your spousal benefit is on the table.” – Chase Reardon

•  “We’re not doctors, obviously, here, right? But if longevity does run in the family and you are relatively healthy, it could pay off waiting (to collect Social Security).” – Chase Reardon

•  “What they’ve done here with the WEP-GPO repeal, I think the simplest way to put it, puts money back in people’s pockets.” – Chase Reardon

•  “Let’s begin the work to run the breakeven analysis to run it through your plan now that we have full-fledged capability of doing that because of the fact that you’re due all the amounts.” – Chase Reardon

Interview Resources

• Chase Reardon on LinkedIn
• Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP)
• Government Pension Offset (GPO)
• FICA
• Ronald Reagan
• Tip O’Neill
• Social Security website  

[INTERVIEW]

Matthew Peck: Welcome, everyone, to another edition of SHP Financial’s Retirement Roadmap Podcast. I’ll be your host, Matthew Peck. Do you know what WEP is? Do you know what GPO is? My guess is that you know that some of the provisions in Social Security has changed and in your favor. Maybe you don’t know, maybe you just got a random check. But one of the bigger changes that came to Social Security just happened in 2025, and we want to make sure that everyone knew about it, everyone knew the impact, both short-term and long-term. We want to make sure that everyone’s getting their checks because benefits have changed and they have changed in your favor, especially if you fell under these WEP and GPO.

Now, don’t worry, we’re going to talk about all these acronyms and abbreviations in a second. That’s why I actually have my acronym and abbreviation expert here with me. His name is Chase Reardon. He’s been with SHP now for over five years, and obviously, he’s a recurring guest on the show, but welcome to the show.

Chase Reardon: Thank you, Matt. It’s always good to be back.

Matthew Peck: Oh, absolutely. All right. So, this is what I want to talk about, all joking aside about the acronyms and whatnot, but this is Social Security. And Social Security has just undergone maybe not the biggest change in a decade or whatever that may be because there’s constant changes, there’s file and suspend, there’s a couple of other things, but it was a significant change and it’s relatively hot off the presses, right? So, Chase, why don’t you walk our clients through what happened and what’s the impact?

Chase Reardon: Yeah. So, Matt, I mean, to your point, this was a major thing that happened. And the reason why is because it actually puts more money in people’s pockets. And to talk a little bit about what WEP actually is, so WEP is what’s called the Windfall Elimination Provision. And what it is, it was signed into law in 1983. And what it did was it actually removed a portion of your Social Security if you were due a pension through the civil service. So, the reason the government did that, though, was because they thought in their calculations, and I understand why they did it, but I’m not going to necessarily agree with it, what they said is, “Oh, well, if you were due a pension through civil service and you didn’t pay into Social Security all these years, but you did qualify, you’re technically earning a little bit more than if you were on Social Security for the entire time.

So, to put it in easy terms, it’s like you have someone who’s working for 30 years, and for 20 of the years there they have their civil service, and then 10 years they’re paying into Social Security. Well, what happened was, once they retired, they would say, “Okay. We’re taking a calculation off your pension and we’re reducing your Social Security by that portion.” So, what they said was, “It’s considered a windfall because if we take the same 30 years of a person in the private sector, they wouldn’t be due as much in terms of a guaranteed benefit in whole.” So, what they said was in 1983, they decided to get rid of that and now reduce your Social Security moving forward when you went to go to collect it, in some cases, actually getting completely rid of it.

So, most people when they look at WEP, WEP applies to you as the filer, the GPO, which the second piece that Matt was kind of talking about, applies mostly to just spousal benefits, which we’ll get into in a second. But that’s kind of the history is why they set it up. And the reason they really repealed it this year was because they want to put more money in people’s pockets. I mean, there was major talk and even protests about people saying, “Oh, well I paid into it. I’m due that amount. It’s an insurance contract with the government.” And the government for a long time was reducing those people’s benefits. So, that’s really what came to light at the end of the last administration. They really pushed forward this and signed it into law this year and people are already getting their checks.

Matthew Peck: Which is amazing too. And the fact that any type of bipartisan bill has passed is usually pretty noteworthy itself and newsworthy itself. But let me also really clarify who this impacts. I mean, this is generally speaking and I’ll list off a couple in my head. Kind of like firefighters and teachers and police officers and anyone that is a town worker because you call it civil service, right? So, town workers, city workers, teachers, yeah. Because sometimes I think of it in regards to like firefighters, right? They’ll do their two 24s, whatever that may be, and then they’ll suddenly have three or four days a week that they’re not on and they’re not at the station. So, let’s just say they have a side gig, right? Let’s say they paint houses on the side, or I don’t know.

Chase Reardon: Or cut trees.

Matthew Peck: Yeah, right. Landscaping. It’s a great point. I mean who knows, right? And so, now this firefighter is paying… He’s part of the, and I’ll say the city of Boston where I’m from, go to Winchester.

Chase Reardon: That’s right.

Matthew Peck: It’s no Lakeville, I know.

Chase Reardon: Oh, yeah.

Matthew Peck: It’s no Lakeville, but it’s not too bad. But no. But let’s just say working for the city of Boston. Obviously, fighting fires, saving lives. And then on the side, yeah, does some landscaping. So, now this individual is part of the city of Boston’s pension, but on the landscaping side, that little side gig, he’s paying FICA taxes. He’s paying Social Security taxes. He’s paying W-2 and he’s paying into Social Security. And so, now after doing both jobs for 30 or 40 years, whatever that may be, he qualifies for Social Security. However, because of the old rules, which we’ll talk about the new rules, but the old rules were that his Social Security was basically almost made non-existent or wiped out because of the WEP provision. Is that a good story to kind of share with how it worked originally?

Chase Reardon: Yeah. I mean, that’s a great point. And I’ve seen that in action. I’ve also seen a lot of the folks that I’ve been meeting with, I do have a lot of teachers that I work with. And a lot of them fall, you know, a lot of them have been teachers for 20, 30 years. I mean, they’re career teachers and they love what they do. And prior to teaching, a lot of them did work in the private sector and they did accrue a good amount of Social Security and they did qualify. It takes 40 credits or 10 years to qualify for Social Security. It doesn’t have to be like Matt said, all in a row. It can be staggered. As long as you got those 40 credits, those 10 years, you will qualify. So, a lot of the folks that I have that are teachers had qualified for Social Security.

So, the major discussion around retirement was, how is the WEP provision going to impact my Social Security? And it was going to be a calculation that we’d have to do and run them through their plan and say, “Okay. Your Social Security’s going to be reduced by X amount.” And now a lot of that kind of weight’s been lifted off our shoulders and of course the family’s shoulders because that no longer applies to them and they’re due the full amount, which we can talk about in a second. But that’s more of like a common scenario I’ve been seeing a lot, especially with the teachers.

Matthew Peck: Well, that’s a great point. Yeah, because I’m thinking about a guy or a gal who is doing sort of two jobs simultaneously. But to your point, imagine you’re in the private sector for 20 years. So, let’s say it went from when you’re 20 to 40, you’re in the private sector and then right around 40 to say, you want to give back, you want to be a teacher, you want to be this. So, then from 40 to 60, let’s say, now you’re in the public sector as a teacher or whatever that is. And so, those 20 years that you had spent in the private sector were completely wiped out. And you were saying, Chase, it was something this weird like calculation where it was like two-thirds reduced and I don’t know, do you even have what that old formula was?

Chase Reardon: Yep. So, the formula, I mean it’s not too… Really, what happened was it was two-thirds of the pension that you were due is where they took that two-thirds and they docked it off your Social Security basically. So, in some cases, depending on how much Social Security you had, to Matt’s point, it was either reduced by a good chunk, or it was completely gone. And that was a major kind of hurdle in every conversation that we would have with these folks is they were somewhat upset. Their Social Security, the first thing they say is, “I paid into it and I’m not getting it.” And that was really where this push to this signing this bill came into effect.

Matthew Peck: Because like back in ‘83 or whatnot, they considered it double dipping. They said, “Look, you’re part of two separate pension systems and we’re only going to pay you one.” And it was a form of… I mean, sorry, I’m actually going to get super nerdy on you here, Chase, because this was part of like Reagan and…

Chase Reardon: Lay it on me, Matt.

Matthew Peck: This was like Reagan and Tip O’Neill. I mean, this was because Tip O’Neill is a local politician but he was the Head of the House of Representatives and this was a massive sort of bipartisan bill back in the day to help preserve and restore and extend Social Security. And so, honestly, Chase, one of my bigger concerns when I heard that they passed this law, I was like, “Okay, that’s absolutely fair.” I think they should call it the Fairness Act or something along those lines. I mean, it’s absolutely…

Chase Reardon: Social Security Fairness Act. Yeah.

Matthew Peck: Okay. Yeah. But it makes complete sense to me because as you were saying, Chase, I mean, people paid into the system. They paid in. They paid taxes. I mean, they are owed these benefits. And then to have the benefits completely eliminated or considered double dipping and things like that are certainly reduced was blatantly unfair, right? At the same time, I’m just worried about Social Security. I mean, have they talked anything about… Because Social Security right now is like predicted to go bankrupt in 10 years. What impacts does that have on the long-term strength of Social Security? Do you know?

Chase Reardon: Yeah. So, that’s a good point, Matt, and I did a lot of looking into this. And the current estimate right now as it stands is Social Security. The fund is supposed to reach what we call a break-even, where money going in is money going out as well to Social Security, right? Because the Social Security is funded, like Matt was talking about, through the FICA payroll. So, what happens is there’s a fund right now. It’s existing almost like a bank account. And right now, or like Matt said, over the next 10-ish years that bank account is going to get drawn down to where it’ll reach a break-even, where the money that’s going in is going out and there’s no surplus.

So, right now the current estimate is 2034, 2033-2034, depending on how you look at it. Now, to Matt’s point, this repeal of the bill is putting more money in people’s pockets, so therefore it naturally will strain the system. I haven’t seen any new estimates of what it would be, and I’m not going to throw a number out there by any stretch of the imagination, but it will put stress on the system. So, over the next, whether it’s the current administration or the next administration, there will need to be some sort of, and I don’t want to say saving grace, but there’s going to be some sort of work that needs to be done to help extend the life of this here.

Matthew Peck: No, for sure. And I think too I look forward and we’ll probably have you back on when they release X. I know they release it annually and so we’ll sort of see what the impact has. Let me go back to day-to-day though. So, you mentioned that literally or let me back up. So, client was impacted by WEP, they passed this law, and then what happens? Did they have to file for the extra money? Did they have to notify Social Security? I want to make sure that everyone’s listening that may have been impacted is getting paid.

Chase Reardon: Right. So, they rolled it out, honestly, quicker than expected from a lot of people. So, the original projection, it was going to take a year to roll out for people that have already filed for Social Security. And now that the WEP is repealed, people that have already filed, there was a lot of confusion on, “Am I going to have to fill out a form? Am I going to have to call Social Security?” They made it very clear pretty much from the get-go that there’s going to be no work that the family or the individual’s going to have to do. It’s more or less when was it going to happen. So, the original projection was it was going to take a year to fully roll out, but they actually fast-tracked it, and as of now, I think it’s like 99% completion of there was nothing you had to file, there’s nothing you have to do.

All you have to do is as long as you file Social Security you’ve been collecting, the government knows this, and they’re already sending checks out and people have already gotten two, three checks that they’ve been due. Now, the catch here, the good catch here is that they did pay retroactively from January of last year. So, if you’ve received a lump sum payment or a series of elevated payments, that’s because they retroactively started paying people from January of 2024. That was really more of the hotter debated topics with this is, how far do they retroactively pay? So, if you’re filing and you’ve filed and you’ve been collecting, there’s nothing that anybody needed to do. No need to call. It was just government took the initiative and started paying people.

Matthew Peck: Interesting. Okay. And so, to be clear, no one needs to take any action. They got a check and the checks went back. They were retroactive to 2024. So, it’s not like it went back to 2000 and you were collecting for 20 years and you’re going to get paid for all those 20 years. It was just sort of one year’s worth of payments?

Chase Reardon: Right. Correct. It would’ve been nice if they went more a little.

Matthew Peck: Well, yeah, and then probably bankrupt Social Security a little bit too soon.

Chase Reardon: I know. Yeah.

Matthew Peck: You find a happy balance there. Okay. So, there’s the WEP and then there’s also something called the GPO and same bill, same impact. And so, what’s the GPO and what role does that play?

Chase Reardon: Yeah. So, the GPO stands for Government Pension Offset. And that’s sometimes where more of the confusion lies is, “What is a GPO and how does it affect me?” Well, they’ve repealed both the WEP and the GPO. The GPO mainly targets spousal benefits, spousal and survivor benefits. So, with that being said, now since the repeal of WEP and GPO is completely off the table now, it doesn’t exist anymore, so whatever you are due from a Social Security on the WEP side, you are entitled to get. And on the GPO side, on the spousal side, that’s where we begin to have the conversation of collecting half my spouse’s.

So, as a spouse, and say, okay, most of the folks that might have been in civil service and don’t have particularly large Social Security payments compared to their spouse’s that’s been in the private sector, the spousal option is now on the table. So, in full capacity, so as an example, like if you’re looking at your Social Security statements and you’re saying, “Okay. Well, I’m due X amount of dollars. I’m due $500 at my full retirement age.” Well, if you go to say, “Okay. Well, I’m going to look at my spouse’s now,” because the GPO has now been repealed, it puts full spousal benefits on the table, you can now say, “Okay. Well, if I take half my spouse’s 50% at my full retirement age, half my spouse’s might be $1,000. So, that just gave you a $500 a month increase in pay.

So, you can’t take a full 50%, and I’m getting a little nerdy on you here, Matt. You can’t take a full 50% of the Social Security until your full retirement age of your spouse.

Matthew Peck: But before they couldn’t do that, so it was like, yes.

Chase Reardon: It was reduced.

Matthew Peck: Yeah. Talk to me about how, what was it before? So, a spouse said, “No, I’m not going to file because I’m not going to get that much.” And now it’s in play or, yeah? I’m just curious like compare and contrast between the old system and the new system.

Chase Reardon: Yeah. So, old system, to keep it simple, is your amount was reduced quite heavily.

Matthew Peck: So, the spousal benefit. I just want to make sure. Okay.

Chase Reardon: Exactly.

Matthew Peck: So, now husband and wife, wife was more sort of a full-time mom and was thinking like, “Okay,” or was the wife the one that had the GPO offset?

Chase Reardon: The wife had the GPO offset. She was, say, a teacher for a long time.

Matthew Peck: Got it. Oh, I see. Got it. Okay.

Chase Reardon: And she said, “Okay.” So, she’s looking at her annual statements that they send in the mail. They don’t send them in the mail anymore. And she’s saying, “Okay. Well, if I can undo $500 a month at my full retirement age,” which most people say, call it 67 years old. And if she collected her spouse’s, say, 1,500 or whatever the number is, say if we’re taking half the spouse, say the spouse is collecting 3,000 and she’s due 50%. That’d be 1,500. But in the old ways, GPO would severely reduce that to where it didn’t even make sense to collect half your spouse’s.

Matthew Peck: And it was the old way, that same idea of like two-third reduction.

Chase Reardon: Yes.

Matthew Peck: Okay. So, it’s really just like WEP was for the person that actually had pension. GPO was impacting the spousal benefits.

Chase Reardon: Exactly. And now since it’s completely repealed, it’s all off the table now. So, now it’s, I guess, fire at will with Social Security on how we collect it. How we’re collecting it is a different story because we talk about the income streams and, is it beneficial to collect earlier versus later? When is retirement? Do you still plan on working and things like that? But the main goal with the GPO is that now your spousal benefit is on the table. So, I’m already having these discussions with folks where it’s like, “Oh, I’m kind of the similar example. I’m due to collect X amount. Is it now that I can collect half my spouse’s or up to half my spouse’s? Does it make sense to collect off of theirs?” And that’s kind of a major conversation I’ve been having.

Matthew Peck: No, I could see that, Chase, because I mean think of it this way. On one hand, the people that were impacted by WEP they’re already in the Social Security system, and so they automatically got a check. And for those folks, the ones that had the pension or did the civil service and private service, when the law was repealed or whatever you want to call it, they didn’t need to take any action because they just saw their checks get increased and the WEP provision was done away with. The GPO might be slightly different though, because let’s say you’re a spouse and you never filed because you just said, “You know what, why bother filing if I’m not going to get anything?” So, there might be some spouses out there that would need to take some action. Is that correct?

Chase Reardon: Yeah. It always helps, especially with spousal benefits, to call them and ask and kind of walk through the scenario with the representative because a lot of the spousal information, really all of it, it’s not going to be available online. And that applies to spousal benefits, survivor benefits, a divorce benefit, and you’re filing off an ex-wife or an ex-husband, things like that. A lot of that information will not be online. So, the recommendation there would definitely be to call Social Security and just tell them the situation. And obviously, talk to your advisors and say, “Okay. Does it make sense to once we gather the information, say, ‘Okay, here are the numbers at the different ages. Do we wait to collect? Does it fit in my plan now? Do we want to wait and get a little bit of a higher benefit?’ because you won’t get that full 50% until your full retirement age.”

So, that’s kind of a bigger misconception out there is if I’m 62, I can collect and start immediately collecting half of my spouse’s, which is not the case. It’s a reduced amount until your full retirement age. So, my recommendation would be to call Social Security because they do a good job online. The online platform for Social Security is pretty good. But it’s pretty much limited to just your information. So, that would be the recommendation.

Matthew Peck: Okay. And I guess to kind of broaden it a little bit, I mean, I’m curious about your sort of day-to-day and with clients, with the repeal or non-repeal of the main topic. Are people going earlier? Are you seeing 62? Are you seeing 65? Are you seeing 67? Like, I know every situation’s unique, don’t get me wrong. But in general, when do you recommend people take Social Security?

Chase Reardon: That’s a good question, Matt. So, a lot of the conversation comes down to a couple of different things, right? The first one is, “Does it fit in your income plan?” is the number one goal here, right? If it fits in your income plan and you’re 62, by all means, fire away. If it fits in your income plan, you want to delay it until 70, then that’s the idea and that’s what you’re comfortable with. But most of the time, a major factor we’re looking at is, “Do you plan to continue to work while collecting?” Because that will really determine, and if so, how much? Because that will determine really when maybe you should start collecting and based on how much you make. Because if you do collect before your full retirement age, which for most folks, it’s either 66 and six months all the way up to 67…

Matthew Peck: It’s just easier to say 67. I know it’s not official because some of them are…

Chase Reardon: You cut me some slack, Matt.

Matthew Peck: It’s just like that whole like 66 in a couple of months. I know it’s real. I mean, don’t get me wrong. Chase is absolutely right where sometimes some people it’s 66 in three months, sometimes 66 in eight months, sometimes 66, and it’s like, as you could tell, the government is not exactly the most convenient agency in the whole wide world there. But for this argument, we’ll just say 67, check. Obviously, check your own date of birth. It might not be 67, but just for simplicity’s sake, let’s go with 67.

Chase Reardon: Yeah. So, if you decide to collect before 67 full retirement age, in this example, what happens is you are capped on how much you can make before they start penalizing your Social Security. So, some families will say, “Oh, well no, Chase, I want to continue to work at least part-time or maybe even full-time, but I want to start collecting around 65 for whatever reason.” Well, the problem with that is when you start collecting and you still continue to work, the current law right now is about $22,000 a year to where they start penalizing your Social Security. So, in that instance, maybe it makes sense to delay, but like in an example where it’s like 65 is some sort of like the golden number for retirement people think of because you’re eligible for Social Security.

That’s where Medicare kicks in. Now, you have your health insurance covered and your health expenses covered. Sixty-five can be a beneficial age where you’re looking at, “Okay, do I continue to delay it a little bit more?” And that obviously comes down to the withdrawal rates in the portfolio. How’s the market doing? I mean, there are many different factors that can go into that, but all in all, it’s like, “What’s the breakeven?” Because everyone talks about the breakeven with Social Security and if we’re looking at a breakeven, we’ve done a lot of… We’ve done, I mean, Matt, at this point, probably thousands of analyses on Social Security and break-evens. The average breakeven because there’s a lot of folks out there that will say, “I’m delaying until 70. I’m delaying until 70,” which is fine.

But if we’re looking at a breakeven between the full retirement age, 67 or 70, the break-even’s usually around 80 to 82 years old to where the 70-year-old payment, the latest delay credit actually pulls ahead in total dollars paid. So, we’re not doctors, obviously, here, right? But if longevity does run in the family and you are relatively healthy, it could pay off waiting if it’s doable, obviously, in your situation, to garner that higher payment, and that payment will then pass on if it’s the higher payment to your spouse if you pass away. So, it can be seen as almost like a hedge, a long-term hedge. And if your spouse is younger, it might be more beneficial to delay. But if the break-even’s around 80 to 82 that full retirement age piece of it, that age is important because it’s like you can still continue to work. You’ve basically almost maxed your benefit. It does grow after that but that’s really seen as like your biggest benefit pretty much until obviously age 70.

So, that’s really the conversations that we’re having with that Social Security piece is, what’s your income need? Do you plan to work? Look at the break-evens, look at the overall income situations. Are there other pensions or other income streams on the table? Does it make sense to defer one or take it now? Those are some of the conversations that we’re having.

Matthew Peck: Well, and I certainly want to go back to the workpiece of that. And also, because you mentioned earlier a term that I want to make sure people understand what’s called the ‘withdrawal rate’ because, on the work aspect of it, I have seen people take Social Security early if they are completely done working. If they’re done at 62-63 and they have no intention of entering back into the workforce, in that situation, if they are then withdrawing back to the whole idea of withdrawal rates, if they retire at 62 or 63, and they start to heavily withdraw from their portfolios from 62 to 67, for five years, then there’s sort of like long-term damage to the portfolio over time to the plan over time because they took all those heavy withdrawals from 62 to 67. You’re tracking?

Chase Reardon: Right.

Matthew Peck: And so, that goes to withdrawal rate and that goes to how much are we spending? Because the other interesting thing about that stage is that’s usually an early retirement or when clients first retire is when they’re spending the most money. That’s where like, “Alright. Let’s go. Like, I got my bucket list and I’m doing this cruise and this trip and doing…” which is great. That’s exactly what it should be. But same idea, if they have like these heavy withdrawal rates and no other money’s coming in, and then to repeat the first point, that they’re completely done working. They’re not going back into the workforce. Then when we’ve been running some of the break-even analyses, it’s better to take it early because you need to sort of help plug that gap and prevent kind of long-term damage.

And the other thing I would add too is the mental aspect, right? It’s scary when you first retire and there’s no money coming in. Now, I could say, “Hey, Chase, don’t worry. I’m going to set you up in this annuity or this dividend stream. I’m going to send you money every month or every quarter. Don’t you worry. The portfolio’s going to work for you.” But still there’s that like, “But I’m used to a paycheck. I’m used to some type of…” It’s like, “Well, don’t worry, Chase. I can recreate this paycheck for you. I can do this. I can do that.” But there’s that mental sort of stress that – and just that comfort level. So, that’s where I just wanted to really kind of isolate that sort of not unique, but the situation where client retires at 62, no intention of ever going back, and has a heavy withdrawal rate early on, then some of these runs, some of these analyses and models and projections that we build out show people that it’s better to take a little bit earlier.

Chase Reardon: Right, right, right. And especially that’s also not even realizing where the market’s going to be at 62 because it’s like if you’re 55 and you’re saying, “All right. Well, I want to trigger Social Security to get 62.” Well, that’s five if my math’s correct, that’s seven years away if you’re 55 years old. You don’t know where the market’s going to be in seven years. But what you do know is you’re going to be spending a lot of money. So, if the market’s not doing well, I mean, that even just exacerbates the fact that’s triggering Social Security to your point, Matt, would be beneficial because it’s like now you have to start selling it potentially, depending on how you’re invested at losses and things like that, that Social Security income stream can really kind of add a little bit of comfort to that, so.

Matthew Peck: Well, and I think too, and I’ll kind of go back to my scenario and just to kind of expand on a little bit, it just always fascinates me what sort of people want to do. I mean, I’ve had some people work 70, 75 years old because they really still enjoy it. And some of it’s their sort of social. That’s their social outlet, right? Not just being productive at work and making money, of course, but also they like the guys and gals they work with, right? Then you have other people that are just done. They say, “Yep, I’m done.” As I said, they have no intention of ever going back, and whether it’s travel or hobbies or whatever that may be. I appreciate the variability there and some people love work and love what they do. Other people just say, “Look, I worked my what off. And I can’t wait to not work anymore.”

And that just goes back to the unique situation, right? And to kind of tie back into WEP and GPO, I mean, now that’s kind of leveled the playing field a little bit where we used to do a whole lot more work to a certain extent, right? Because we used to do all the calculations to say, “Okay. Hey, here’s your impact here. Now, I mean, that sort of simplifies things a little bit, which is great, but I still enjoy everyone’s unique situation and building a Social Security plan and building an income plan for their needs.

Chase Reardon: Right. No, I hear you, Matt. I mean, I think that what they’ve done here with the WEP-GPO repeal, I think simplest way to put it, puts money back in people’s pockets, and now it’s like we can have an additional conversation of, okay, we have another lever here that we can pull in the plan that now benefits you and gets more money in your pocket. So, now going back to the original conversations, it’s like now we start talking about the spousal benefit aspect of it. Now, maybe we talk about your benefit of it relating to WEP, and it’s like, “Okay, do we have that full-blown Social Security conversation that we didn’t think we were going to have with you for at least a while because of this repeal?” So, yeah.

Matthew Peck: I think it goes back to when we talk about the different analysis or analyses and break-even scenarios and all that stuff, I just love the value that we’re able to offer and give to clients. So, when they do eventually make that decision, it’s been a well-researched decision. We’ve crunched all those numbers. We have made sure the fact that they know the break-even age. I mean, because every break-even age is a little bit different based on their situation. And so, I think I just love being able to, because it’s a one-time decision, right? And you’re not going to file for Social Security and then five years later say, “You know what, I want to change. I want to delay it or I want to do this, or I want to do that.” It really is a major decision that you don’t want to get wrong.

And you never know, as you said, we’re not doctors so who knows what the future holds in that sense? But you just want to be able to make it confidently to know that you looked at it from every different angle and every different facet to say, “Yes, I think this one works for me.” And so, again, just love being able to offer that value there. Are there other areas on the provisions that people should be aware of or other changes to Social Security?

Chase Reardon: No. I mean, there’s really not a whole lot to it. I mean, to put it very simply, the GPO no longer exists. So, I mean, it’s really important to just understand that, “Okay. Now, my full numbers are on the table.” Let’s begin the work to run the breakeven analysis to run it through your plan now that we have full-fledged capability of doing that because of the fact that you’re due all the amounts. Now, in terms of a couple of different questions we usually get asked, usually the first one that we get asked is, “Where can I find my Social Security benefits?” which is, I mean…

Matthew Peck: It’s a good place to start.

Chase Reardon: It’s a good place to start.

Matthew Peck: Great question.

Chase Reardon: And they don’t send you the statements anymore. So, every meeting I have with folks who are like, “Oh, they didn’t send me.” You got to log in at ssa.gov is the website.

Matthew Peck: Ssa.gov.

Chase Reardon: Ssa.gov. You can log in there. You’ll have all your information on there. Again, the spousal information, if you’re looking in regards to your spouse or an ex-spouse, it really won’t be on there. That’s when you should call. But usually, we get, okay, how do I locate ssa.gov for my up-and-coming new Social Security filers now that this is off the table? That’s where I would find it. And there’s a couple of other questions here. I mean…

Matthew Peck: Yeah. No, give them all. Everyone, they’re asking these questions, Chase, so let’s give it to them.

Chase Reardon: Right. So, another common one we get is, “Can my Social Security increase if I continue to work?” Now, this is a good one because I get this one a lot. And that answer is yes. If you are at your full retirement age and you’re still making “good money” where it’s pretty much the same as it was before, or it’s the exact same, or maybe it’s a little less, or maybe it’s even a little bit more, Social Security takes your highest 35 years of earnings. So, if those years fall as high-earning years, you will get that added benefit. So, that’s one I get very commonly is, “Will my Social Security go up?” It will not go down. It will not go down if you have less earning years.

So, it’s like if you’re making money, you’re doing well at your job and everything, and then all of a sudden you go part-time and you’re collecting, it’s not like the calculation, the average gets drawn down, right? That’s not what happens. So, if anything, it’ll stay the same. Or if you make good money, it will go up. So, that’s a common question I get as well.

Matthew Peck: Nice. Okay. And then, any other FAQs that we want to leave our audiences before we wrap up?

Chase Reardon: No. I mean, I think that’s really it. I mean, it’s interesting to see when that annual report comes out of the new calculation of the fund, which we’ll probably be watching very closely and we’ll be communicating that, as we meet with our folks, but I’m glad they passed this, put more money in people’s pockets and I’m glad that’s the case.

Matthew Peck: Well, and also again the fact that they simplified it, right, all those two-thirds and who falls under the WEP provision, who falls under the GPO provision, and spousal benefits versus personal benefits and things along those lines. I mean, anything that they can do to simplify the system, I’m certainly a big fan of to say the least. And, Chase, yeah, we’ll definitely have you back on once the new sort of trust fund, what’s the most upcoming one, which will probably be later on this year. We’ll have you back on and then we’ll continue on to talk about the impact of WEP and just the vital role that Social Security plays in the foundation of a retirement income plan. And making sure that you make that decision right and making sure that we have a handle of how much you have there and making that Social Security selection. And checking on pension selections if they’re there and how to build an income plan because it’s a building block.

And understanding how that building block works and understanding how to maximize that building block is something that we do every single day. And so, hopefully, for all of our listeners, you get an idea of today of how we’re staying on top of it, and we’ll continue to stay on top of it on behalf of you and your family, and everyone that we know. So, thank you so much for lending us your ears. And be well.

[END]