GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Catch-62

• 88184
  

  I am presently employed with the AF. I was in the Army from 75 to 81. I worked for the P.O. from 83 to 91 under CSRS and paid for my military time. I resigned from the P.O. and took all my retirement out including my military service payback. I got back in the system late 99 and coverted to FERS. I quailify for S.S. @ 63yrs 8 months. I will not repay my P.O. time back so will I be penalized?

  Tony Bowen Posted September 30, 2009 4:48 PM
• 87182
  

  Judging by some of the comments, it's not clear to them that "Catch 62" applies to CSRS retirees. FERS retirees must make the military deposit in order for their military service to count toward annuity computation. The AF requires retirees with military service to submit an OPM 1515 with their retirement applications. The OPM 1515 clearly states the "Catch 62" provision for CSRS retirees.

  Glenn Miller Posted September 21, 2009 4:08 PM
• 43876
  

  Thanks for getting the word out - the best way to avoid getting caught in "Catch 62" is to make your military service credit deposit before retiring.

  Barring that, the only option is an MSPB appeal of OPM's decision...it's a difficult decision to have to choose between hiring an attorney or paying the bills, particularly AFTER the OPM drastically reduces your annuity and you are less able to replace the lost income with another job or financial planning.

  Catch 62 cases can be won at the MSPB, especially by retirees that retired from Federal Service between 1982 and the late 1990's.

  OPM and Federal Agencies do a really poor job of advising their retiring employees about the specifics of the Catch-62 provisions, by burying the details in the "fine print".

  I talk to at least 3-4 annuitants a month who were never even told the amount of their deposit, that were retired with a pre-1982 retirement application, etc...it's amazing to me how often civil servants are misled by their Agency or OPM.

  I implore you - make your deposit before you retire. If you really weren't counseled or informed, call an attorney and get some help filing in the MSPB!

  Chris Attig Posted February 19, 2008 10:14 PM
• 36318
  

  It shouldn't be too difficult for the government to cross match or "find" the people that would be affected by the Catch 62 rule and educate them. My husband and I were lucky that I got the infomation in a retirement seminar I attended as a speaker for the IRS on how your pension is taxed. He had been told that it was not worthwhile to do the deposit on the 20 years of military service. Boy was that wrong! He now draws full CSRS and Social Security. The deposit doubled for us due to the interest charged on the deposit and the years it went unpaid because we didn't have the correct information. In the end, it was worth it.

  Barb Bennett Posted November 1, 2007 8:53 AM
• 34856
  

  I am a retired AF and retired civil service person who was under FERS. No one explained any of this catch 62 to me, however, I was 62 when I retired, and now I work as a contractor for the U.S. Army in the Pentagon and I get both my full USAF and civil service retirement, and according to the S.S.A. when I finally retire, there will not be any off-set because I did a full 20 years in the A.F., and retired from civil service. So, why would someone have to do a minimum of 20 years in the civil service too, or have your social security reduced. Am I missing something here? The social security office has sent me my projected retirement at various years in the future, and there is no penalty included in any of their calculations.

  Joe Arnaud Posted October 12, 2007 11:56 AM
• 34794
  

  Could Jerry have gone back to work for the government and then paid into his military retirement to remedy the problem?

  Richard Lucas Posted October 12, 2007 5:47 AM
• 33797
  

  I agree with Abbey. This Congress we have will be quick to blame this veteran of twenty years, for not understanding the details of retirement. How can a man service this country for twenty years be Honorably Discharged and this country treat him that way. He said he would pay the deposit back!!! What a shame. I'm sure those rules and the entire ramifications were not explained to him. To bad to sad it's his fault, wow what an answer. But now the Congress is getting ready to vote for social security for illegal immigrants. I bet they will be provided with tons of translators at the border. The first translations will probably be "Whatever you do don't join the military the veterans in this country get treated to bad. Let them risk their lives, we will collect the social security it's a deal Congress is on our side ,and we can't even vote."

  Nolan Posted September 25, 2007 4:15 PM
• 33745
  

  I am under FERS and learned about the "Catch-62" as an intern through Govexec around 2000. I checked with the other veteran in my office (there were two of us) and he gave me the basics. A call to my HR office and they faxed me the forms. I was able to buy my six years of active duty time and since I was within three years of starting as a civil servant, I didn't have to pay interest. An important thing to remember for people just starting with the civil service is that you have to buy your military time within the first three years or you will have to pay the principal plus interest. Some of the best money I ever spent. I have since helped some other veterans just starting out with the Government.

  Andrew Cole Posted September 25, 2007 7:59 AM
• 33602
  

  Unfortunately, people make bad decisions that can affect them for a lifetime. He should have researched the "Catch-62" issue long before he retired. I am sure that he had many coworkers that had military service that made the "right" decision to make the military payback before retiring. Lets get Congress to repeal the Windfall provision.

  James Posted September 22, 2007 8:05 AM
• 33554
  

  He should contact his congressman. I believe they can introduce special bills to fix specific individual situations like this, especially given the circumstance that he was not properly advised by his government personnel office.

  Craig Brown Posted September 21, 2007 11:30 AM
• 33549
  

  You'll never see the Windfall Profit Elimination Act repealed. It is funding the illegal aliens and the new Iraqis coming in. They will thank you for it.

  abbey Posted September 21, 2007 10:37 AM
• 33547
  

  The same thing happened to my husband. His DOD personnel officer did not explain to him the consequences of not completing a minimum of 20 years of Civil Service; he only had two years to go. When my husband reached 62, his retirement check was actually decreased by 51%. He was told that Social Security would make up the difference. That's a joke. According to Social Security, he was entitled to $700 a month - less than half of what was cut from his retirement check. But then, it was reduced another $200 due to the Windfall Elimination. He never did file to collect from Social Security as he was waiting until he reached the age where his Social Security check would not be cut by work related earnings. He passed away in 2000 at the age of 64 while still fully employed by a state agency. I was his second wife and am a federal employee. No matter what my retirement will be, I am not "entitled" to get anything based on his Social Security earnings as I fall under the Offset Provision. I will get nothing from Civil Service, either, as the court ordered that his first wife was "to be supported for the rest of her life" (which ended in the fall of 2006).

  JoAnn Posted September 21, 2007 10:27 AM
• 33544
  

  They should reconsider his case and the others like his. If he was not properly counseled, he should not be held accountable. The retirement section of each agency should be held accountable. If their staff is not properly trained, then get them trained. In effect, the advice the retirement counselor passed on to him was not correct. He should not penalized and the Merit Systems Board needs to conduct a thorough investigation.

  Toni Posted September 21, 2007 10:17 AM
• 33536
  

  My husband started civilian svc prior to 1982. He will be retiring prior to age 62. What happens if he does not have his 40 quarters in at age 62 but will have them at age 63 or later?

  Virginia Groves Posted September 21, 2007 9:37 AM
• 33532
  

  I think that the Catch-62 was changed in 1999 or 2000. I was told then that it was still a good idea to pay for it, so that you qualify for medicare when you reach age 62 or 65. In other words, even though they will not recompute your pay, you may want to pay for it so you have enough "quarters/credits" to qualify for medicare. Are you sure your article is still current or correct?

  Ron Hess Posted September 21, 2007 9:23 AM
• 33524
  

  Just a note: Social Security beneftis might be reduced also due to the windfall elimination that was passed during the Reagan administration. He might suffer a double whammy. Full SSA retirement would only be payable if he had 30 years of covered employment, and this story doesn't indicate he did. This needs to be changed!

  Richard Black Posted September 21, 2007 8:27 AM