Lawmakers are urging the Social Security Administration (SSA) to revise how it is applying the Social Security Fairness Act (SSFA), arguing that some beneficiaries should receive a full year of retroactive spousal benefits rather than the six months currently allowed in certain cases.
Section 4 of the Act, titled “Effective Date,” states that the amendments “shall apply with respect to monthly insurance benefits payable under title II of the Social Security Act for months after December 2023.” The senators emphasized that the statute “makes no distinction between current beneficiaries and new applicants for spousal benefits.”
The dispute centers on retroactive payments. In earlier correspondence dated April 1, 2025, the lawmakers objected to SSA “only granting a maximum of six months retroactivity in certain circumstances, despite the SSFA explicitly calling for one year of retroactivity.”
SSA responded April 25, saying it would provide one year of retroactive benefits only to individuals who were receiving benefits as of January 2024 or who filed an application on or before that time. For new applicants, the agency said retroactive payments would be limited to six months prior to the date of application, citing Section 202(j)(1) of the Social Security Act, which generally caps retroactive payments for new applicants at six months.
The senators said that if Congress had intended to exclude new applicants from the Act’s effective date, “it would have said so. But Congress made no such indication.” They urged the commissioner “to apply the Act’s effective date to all affected spouses equally given the absence of any congressional intent to the contrary.”
The letter also addressed concerns about how prospective applicants were advised before the law’s passage. While SSA has said it “consistently encouraged members of the public who have been affected by the SSFA to consider applying for benefits if they had not previously done so,” the senators wrote that it remains unclear when that guidance began. They said some constituents reported that such advice “was not consistently given in the years or months leading to the Act’s passage.”
“We do not fault SSA for not having a crystal ball,” the lawmakers added, noting that neither Congress nor the agency could have predicted when the legislation would pass. They argued that this uncertainty is “exactly why Congress did not distinguish between new and current beneficiaries in setting the Act’s effective date.”
Meanwhile, regular monthly benefits continue under the agency’s 2026 payment cycle. Social Security retirement and disability benefits are distributed on a staggered schedule each month, typically on the second, third, and fourth Wednesdays, depending on a recipient’s birth date.
Beneficiaries who began receiving payments before May 1997 are generally paid on the third day of each month. Supplemental Security Income is usually issued on the first of the month, though payments may be moved earlier if that date falls on a weekend or federal holiday.
The SSA has already implemented a cost-of-living adjustment for 2026, increasing monthly benefit amounts to account for inflation.