As we all know, the two-year salary freeze has a loophole. Step increases will still be granted. This suggests another way to achieve savings, a way that will be permanent, and will ultimately save more money.
The deficit commission has proposed changing federal retirement to use the highest five years of earnings to calculate civil service pension benefits for new retirees (CSRS and FERS) rather than the highest three years. How much of a difference would this make in a retirement annuity? It depends. Here are several scenarios.
Were you in the military prior to 2002? Are you going to qualify for Social Security? If you answered “yes” to both questions, I have good news for you! You are going to receive extra earnings credits, which will result in a higher Social Security benefit. Hereâ€™s how it works.
What is the FERS annuity supplement and how is it calculated? The author says that OPM is over-paying FERS annuity supplements because of differences in how OPM calculates the supplement from how the Social Security Administration calculates payments.
Military service is generally creditable for civilian retirement, but it must be paid for by the employee. This is referred to as “buying back” the military time, or making the “military deposit.” Sometimes it pays to buy back the time and other times it does not.
How is severance pay calculated for a federal employee?
FERS employees who retire prior to age 62 are entitled to an annuity supplement, either immediately or upon attaining the MRA (Minimum Required Age). Some believe the supplement can equal, or even exceed, the amount of the annuity itself. Can this be true?
Is there really an ongoing â€œtidal waveâ€ of retirements? If yes, is there evidence for it? If evidence shows there is no tidal wave, then why would a Federal agency foster such an impression?
Author Robert Benson wrote an article this week on the use of a privately owned vehicle while conducting business on behalf of the federal government. The article generated numerous comments. Rather than responding to each comment, here is his overall response to those readers who took the time to send in their reaction to the article.
Widespread use of privately owned vehicle commitments would mean a dramatic reduction in motor pools and a net savings for the taxpayer.