Government Executive - Pay & Benefits

Sorting through Medicare myths in federal retirement decisions

Tammy Flanagan — Thu, 30 Apr 2026 15:00:00 -0400

One of the most common questions I am asked is “What should I do about Medicare when I retire ... or turn 65?” I love to answer this question; however, the reason it is so complicated is because there is so much misinformation floating around. Here are some of the things I hear, along with reasons why it is important to take time to consider the pros and cons of adding Medicare to FEHB.

Myth: Adding Medicare Part B is too expensive.

It is true that adding Medicare Part B will add a minimum of $202.90/month in premiums to your monthly expenses. It is also true that this isn’t a self-plus one enrollment, as each spouse pays this premium individually. What is also true is that the cost of Part B of Medicare can be offset by the benefits of enrollment. With many FEHB plans, your deductible, copayments and coinsurance costs are waived for outpatient medical care when Part B is your primary payer. This means that you may save up to the catastrophic cap that you would have otherwise paid out of pocket for your care. In addition, there are a handful of plans that provide a partial rebate of the premium: BC/BS Basic (Plan Code 11) provides $800/year per eligible individual; MHBP HDHP (Plan Code 43) provides a $1,200 health fund that is eligible to be sued for Part B reimbursement; and Aetna Direct (Plan Code N6) provides a $900/year health fund per eligible individual.

Myth: Since I am subject to Income Related Monthly Adjustment Amount (IRMAA) surcharges, it is not worth adding Part B.

In 2026, IRMAA affects Medicare enrollments when your Modified Adjusted Gross income from two years prior to the current year exceeds $109,000 (single taxpayer) or $218,000 (married filing jointly). This adds an additional premium of $81.20/month, up to as much as $487/month, to the $202.90 standard premium.

In this situation, it is not all about “getting your money’s worth,” but more of an issue of “pay me now” or “pay me later.” If you decide to forego enrollment in Medicare Part B, be sure that you are prepared to pay an increasing amount of out of pocket costs if your health care needs increase as you get older.

It is hard to imagine, if you are healthy at age 65 and not currently suffering from chronic health problems, why adding a cost that is more than you would typically spend out of pocket for health care could possibly be a good idea.

Try to consider that at age 65, you may have decades of life left to live and some of those years you may suffer from serious and chronic health conditions requiring ongoing care and treatment. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, 20% of women who are age 85 and older report that they are in poor health, with 24% reporting five or more chronic health conditions and 54% reporting at least one functional limitation where assistance may be needed with dressing, bathing, feeding, toileting or incontinence.

Consider also that items such as home health are covered under Medicare Part B as follows:

In most cases, “part-time or intermittent” means you may be able to get skilled nursing care and home health aide services up to eight hours a day (combined), for a maximum of 28 hours per week. You may be able to get more frequent care for a short time (less than eight hours each day and no more than 35 hours each week) if your provider decides it’s necessary.

Under FEHB plans, the coverage is not as generous. For example, Standard Option BC/BS provides coverage for home health care as follows:

Home nursing care (skilled) for two hours per day when: a registered nurse (R.N.) or licensed practical nurse (L.P.N.) provides the services; and a physician orders the care. You pay: 15% of the Plan allowance using preferred providers; 35% of the Plan allowance using participating providers or non-participating providers. In addition, you will pay any difference between our allowance and the billed amount. Benefits for home nursing care are limited to 50 visits per person, per calendar year.

Check Section 5 of your FEHB plan brochure to see how this type of care is covered in your plan. When Medicare is primary, BC/BS Standard Option will waive your deductible and coinsurance for this care. If you need more than two hours per day, Medicare will cover 80% of the cost up to eight hours per day, up to 28 hours per week for as long as medically necessary.

Another example of a medical need that may increase with older adults is physical, occupational or speech therapy. Benefits are limited to 75 visits per person, per calendar year for a combination of all three types of therapy with BC/BS Standard Option; however, coverage under Medicare is not subject to this type of limitation. In other words, there are types of coverage that Medicare offers beyond the plan limits of your federal health coverage.

Myth: It is better to keep your current health plan instead of enrolling in Medicare Part B.

Every federal health plan carrier provides a plan or option that coordinates with Medicare. This may not be the plan that has served you and your family in the past. Instead of limiting your decision to whether Medicare Part B is necessary, consider that plans that cater to the needs of older adults with Medicare will often be less expensive and reduce your out of pocket costs enough to offset the premium for Medicare Part B. Check your health plan website, where you will find information about the plans offered by each carrier that work best with Medicare. You can find your plan brochures and links to your plan on OPM's website.

Myth: By enrolling in Part B, I won’t be able to see the providers I want to see.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, virtually all (98%) non-pediatric physicians participate in the Medicare program. Furthermore, Medicare beneficiaries report access to physician services that is equal to, or better than, that of privately insured individuals.

In 11 specialties, the share of physicians who have opted out of Medicare is 0.5% or lower, with the lowest shares seen among emergency medicine physicians (0.1%), oncologists (0.1%), radiologists (0.1%) and pathologists (<0.1%).
Psychiatrists account for the largest share (39.0%) of all non-pediatric physicians who opted out of Medicare in 2024, followed by family medicine physicians (21.5%) and internal medicine physicians (13.0%).
Less than 2% of non-pediatric physicians have opted out of Medicare in 47 states. The rate is slightly higher in three states and the District of Columbia: Alaska (2.8%), Colorado (2.3%), Idaho (2.2%) and the District of Columbia (2.9%).

Consider the following numbers reported on the 60th anniversary of Medicare and Medicaid in 2025:

Over 1.5 million doctors, health care providers and suppliers participate in Medicare.
380,063: The number of Medicare intuitional providers, including hospitals, labs and skilled nursing facilities.
163.1 million: The number of unique individuals who have been entitled to Medicare at any point in program history (1966-2024).
62.7 million: The number of Americans enrolled in Medicare in 2024, up from 19 million when the program began.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that Medicare enrollment will reach 80 million within the next 10 years, and 100 million by 2075.
Medicare Fee-for-Service processes over 1.1 billion claims each year — about 3 million per day, or 35 per second.
62.9 million: People currently enrolled in Medicare Part B, which covers doctor visits, outpatient care, some home health and preventive services.

Myth: I will wait until I’m older, and I need more health care to enroll in Part B.

In most cases, if you missed your Part B Initial Enrollment Period (IEP), which runs from the three months before the month of your 65th birthday through the three months after the month of your 65th birthday, you will face a late enrollment penalty if you decide to enroll at a later time during the annual General Enrollment Period (GEP), which runs from January through March. The penalty equals 10% of the standard monthly premium for each 12-month period that you delayed enrollment and will be added to your premium costs for the remainder of your enrollment.

If you did not enroll for Part B during your IEP, you may qualify for a Special Enrollment Period (SEP) to sign up for Part B (and/or Part A) anytime as long as you or your spouse is working and you’re covered by a group health plan through that employment. For people age 65 or over who have coverage through a group health plan, there is also an eight-month SEP, which starts the month after the employment ends, or the group health plan coverage ends. If you sign up during SEP, the late enrollment penalty will not apply.

Myth: Federal retirees do not need Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage.

In most FEHB plans, members with Medicare Part A and/or Part B primary are eligible for the benefits under the plan’s Employer Group Waiver Plan (EGWP) - Medicare Prescription Drug Program (MPDP). This coverage is optional for FEHB members. Before opting out of this benefit, there are some important reasons to stay enrolled, such as:

Equal or better coverage for every drug covered by your traditional FEHB plan
Coverage for numerous drugs not covered on the traditional FEHB plan
Lower out of pocket costs under each drug tier
A more expansive 90-day retail pharmacy network
An annual maximum of $2,100 on what you pay for Part D-covered prescriptions

There are a few downsides to enrollment in an FEHB MPDP program.

These plans, like Medicare Parts A and B, have no coverage for drugs obtained and/or purchased overseas.
Although there is no additional premium for enrollment in FEHB MPDP, you may need to pay an Income-Related Monthly Adjustment Amount (IRMAA) of $14.50/month, up to $91.00/month in 2026, to Social Security for this Part D coverage.
Learn more about the income thresholds and IRMAA amounts.
Your FEHB plan website has specific information on the MPDP offered by your FEHB plan option.

FEHB Medicare PDP EGWP allows members — who might otherwise forgo Medicare drug coverage — to benefit from the Medicare system they paid into, often for decades. Auto-enrollment is intended to make the process easier; however, both the Office of Personnel Management and Medicare rules allow FEHB plans to auto-enroll eligible members. Auto-enrolled members may opt out within 21 days or may disenroll at any time.

Myth: FEHB plans that offer Medicare Employer Group Waiver Plan (EGWP) Advantage plans are the same as individual Medicare Advantage plans.

Since the introduction of Medicare Advantage more than 20 years ago, the number of people choosing these plans has been steadily increasing. In 2023, 51% or 30.8M of all Medicare beneficiaries signed up, up from 33% in 2018. By 2033, 62% are expected to join. Medicare Advantage, known as Part C, covers the same services as Original Medicare Parts A and B and often includes additional benefits — on average, $600 worth of supplemental benefits to each participant.

Most FEHB plan carriers now offer Medicare Advantage Employer Group Waiver Plans (MA-EGWP) to maintain or enhance coverage for beneficiaries, while reducing both immediate costs and long-term liabilities. There is no additional cost to enrollment in a MA-EGWP through an FEHB plan offering this option; however, there is a second step that you must take to enroll in this option, where the plan requires proof of your enrollment in Medicare A and B. These plans include a reduction in your Part B premium, Medicare Part D prescription drug benefits. Most provide dental and vision benefits, along with perks such as free gym membership, meal delivery following a hospital stay and transportation to a limited number of non-emergency medical care visits.

Unlike individual MA plans, the FEHB MA-EGWP plans allow you to return to your FEHB plan by disenrolling in the option. The FEHB MA-EGWP plans may also provide nationwide coverage. For example, the Compass Rose High Option plan offers the following regarding its MA-EGWP option:

The Compass Rose Medicare Advantage Plan is a UnitedHealthcare Group Medicare Advantage Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plan, which means you have flexibility in choosing a provider. You have access to providers nationwide and receive the same level of benefits in network and out of network. You may see any provider that accepts Medicare. You can see any out-of-network doctor or health care provider that participates in Medicare and accepts the plan. Accepting the plan means the doctor is willing to treat you and bill UnitedHealthcare. If a doctor or hospital refuses to directly bill UnitedHealthcare, they may ask that you pay the full allowable amount. In that case, you can pay the doctor and then submit your claim to UnitedHealthcare. You will be reimbursed for the cost of the claim, less your copay. The FEHB BC/BS plans do not offer an EGWP-MA option currently.

]]>

House GOP on Trump’s 2027 pay freeze: ‘That’s politics’

Erich Wagner — Mon, 27 Apr 2026 18:44:56 -0400

Republican appropriators in the House last week thwarted efforts by their Democratic colleagues to override President Trump’s apparent plan to freeze civilian federal employees’ pay next year and restore civil service and workplace protections currently on the chopping block.

The House Appropriations Committee voted along party lines to advance its draft of the fiscal 2027 Financial Services and General Government spending bill last week, the culmination of a marathon markup hearing that spanned multiple days. That legislation is traditionally the vehicle by which lawmakers move to overrule a president’s pay raise plans for the following year.

Earlier this month, President Trump released his budget blueprint for fiscal 2027, but the document was silent on civilian federal compensation. An Office of Management and Budget spokesperson told Government Executive that the plan envisions a pay freeze next year, while military personnel would get raises between 5 and 7% next year, depending on their rank. Last year, Trump’s so-called “skinny budget” was similarly silent on federal pay, but the president ultimately implemented a 1% across-the-board increase for most feds, with supplementary increases for feds in some law enforcement positions.

Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., urged lawmakers to support a 3.1% raise for feds, a figure he said was aimed at approximating the cost-of-living adjustment federal retirees and Social Security beneficiaries would likely see next year. Democrats earlier this year put forth a plan to provide a 4.1% average pay raise to federal civilian workers, split between a 3.1% across-the-board increase and a 1% average increase in locality pay.

“[This raise would be] a recognition of the extraordinary service that they perform on a regular basis for the American people, and very importantly, in carrying out the duties that we have assigned them through legislation,” Hoyer said. “[This] enmity toward government ought not be enmity toward federal employees. We ought not to devalue them.”

But Rep. David Joyce, R-Ohio, chairman of the panel’s financial services and general government subcommittee, said his caucus would not step on the president’s toes in his efforts to reshape the federal workforce, including on issues of compensation.

“Just as President Biden increased the workforce by 6%, this administration has made streamlining the workforce and reducing spending two of its main goals,” he said. “Presidents often use alternative pay plans when setting pay increases, and this president has chosen to increase law enforcement [salaries] at a higher rate than office workers, which is his prerogative. That’s the reality of politics, and that’s exactly why we have elections every four years.”

The amendment failed by a 28-32 vote.

Hoyer also proposed an amendment that would have barred federal agencies from using fiscal 2027 funding to implement a pair of new job categories—Schedule Policy/Career and Schedule G. The first, formerly known as Schedule F, threatens to strip at least 50,000 career federal workers in “policy-related” positions of their civil service protections, making them at-will employees, while Schedule G creates a new avenue to hire more political appointees into government.

“What they want to do is, which the [1883] Pendleton Act was designed to avoid, is the politicization of the civil service,” Hoyer said. “The pride of our country has been that we have a non-hack civil service, a civil service composed of people who carry out their duties faithfully, and if they don’t, they ought to be fired. But what they should not be is turned into 50,000 additional political appointees, by either administration, Democrat or Republican.”

Joyce again declined to mount a policy defense but nonetheless opposed the measure. Republicans defeated the amendment by a 27-33 vote.

“While I certainly appreciate his various positions regarding some of the administration’s changes to the federal workforce, they fall within his prerogative,” he said. “The previous president made workforce changes as well, and these prerogatives only reinforce that elections have consequences.”

Rep. Glenn Ivey, D-Md., offered another amendment, this time blocking federal funds from being used to terminate collective bargaining agreements pursuant to the president’s pair of executive orders stripping two-thirds of the federal workforce of their union rights on national security grounds. The proposal mirrored a bill that the House approved on a bipartisan basis last December, following a successful discharge petition, but has stalled in the Senate.

“I represent a district where we have tens of thousands of federal government employees, many of whom were impacted by that EO, and these people are hardworking patriotic Americans, dedicated to serving the United States,” he said. “Many of them are veterans, who elected to continue to serve the public by becoming federal employees after they left military service and I think it’s important to treat all of these people fairly.”

But Republicans again opposed the measure, on the grounds that the issue falls under another committee’s purview. The amendment failed by a 29-31 vote, with Rep. Nick Lolota, R-N.Y., a sponsor of last year’s bill, joining Democrats in support.

]]>

They did everything right and still haven’t been paid

Tammy Flanagan — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 15:00:00 -0400

I was planning to write about the number of TSP millionaires for this week’s column — until I started getting messages from former federal employees, all who retired on September 30, 2025, and are still waiting for their retirement benefit from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to be finalized.

It is not completely surprising that retirement processing has slowed down, and for some former employees, they continue to wait for their retirement benefits to be finalized. But for the employees who have reached out for assistance, many have not received any money since their last paycheck was received in October 2025.

It has been almost six months with very little or, in some cases, no money and little communication to help them understand how long they will have to continue to wait.

Here are the stories that I received this week:

Angie retired from the USDA Farm Service. Angie represents one of the thousands of federal employees who accepted the Deferred Resignation Program (DRP) and agreed to resign or retire at the end of the fiscal year in 2025.

Angie told me that she has been preparing for retirement by attending pre-retirement training, and she saved her annual leave so that she would have some money to hold her over while her retirement was being processed. She also saved extra money so that she could pay her bills for up to six months should her retirement be delayed. She considered herself as prepared as she could be.

After numerous calls to OPM, with many hours spent waiting on hold, she finally found out what appears to be the reason why she has not received any of her retirement benefits since her last day of work.

Angie was divorced 13 years ago. Her court order clearly stated that she and her ex-spouse would not share any of their retirement benefits. She answered “no” to the question on the retirement application regarding her former spouse having any entitlement to her retirement and/or survivor benefits.

She did not include a copy of her divorce agreement, as the application required that the document be included only if he were entitled to benefits. Unfortunately, a copy of her court order had been sent to OPM, presumably by her HR specialist. For some reason, a copy had been filed in her personnel file.

The first thing she was told by OPM was that the copy was emailed and was not a “certified copy” of the order. Unfortunately, Angie was not informed of this until months after her retirement date. She stated that she would have been happy to provide a certified copy had she known the reason for the delay.

She was also informed that there were “red flags” because she had a name change during her career and a change in health insurance from self plus one to self only. The OPM customer service representative told her that her retirement package was sent to the Court Ordered Benefits Branch, where it sat waiting for review.

Angie recently requested assistance from her congressional representative, and she thinks that this may have helped. She received promising news on her latest phone call to OPM earlier this week.

She was told that her case is now showing that it is “ready for payment!” Angie hopes that she will soon see a large deposit in her bank account, with her first regular payment on May 1. However, she said, “I will believe that when I see the money!”

Laura, who retired from the IRS, shared with me that she spoke with a benefits specialist at her former agency who told her that her paperwork wasn’t sent to the National Finance Center (NFC) until Feb. 1.

In addition, she was informed that, from that date, it would likely be an additional 90-day wait before her retirement package would be forwarded to OPM. The reason why her retirement wasn’t sent to NFC until February was unclear.

Other than that, she was told that it wasn’t assigned to a retirement specialist in her human resources office until Dec. 31. She received her lump-sum annual leave payout in early February from NFC, which was promising, but nothing else.

She has not yet received any communication from OPM. She has now submitted a request to her elected representatives in Congress in hopes that it will help her to receive her overdue benefits soon.

Shawn, who also retired on Sept. 30, has also been waiting for his retirement benefits since his last day on the job on Sept. 30, 2025.

He stated that he retired as a 37-year IRS revenue officer advisor, GS-13, one of the most senior in the country. He accepted the DRP 2.0 in response to the mandate in 2025 requiring him to return to his physical office. He had been working from home since 2021.

He stated that he consistently received outstanding performance ratings and did not want to change his remote work arrangement. As of this week, he has not received any annuity payments.

He understands that the IRS Human Capital Office (HCO) has a massive backlog, as does OPM. IRS HCO informed him that OPM has his retirement package now. However, when he contacted OPM, they told him that they had not received his retirement package.

Shawn, like many others, contacted his congressman’s office, but so far they could not get the package pushed through.

He informed me that he has had to take two large distributions from his Thrift Savings Plan to pay bills. He is now at the point where he may have to take another.

It appears that the delays may stem from the payroll provider, NFC. After HR completes work on the retirement application, it must go through payroll processing before OPM can begin work on the claim.

As Laura related above, there were extraordinary delays reported regarding the processing of the thousands of retirement cases that descended on NFC since Sept. 30, 2025.

Susan, another Sept. 30 retiree, related to me that her retirement application has been in NFC since Jan. 12 — no movement, no communication.

She made a request for assistance but only received a canned response that was not helpful in letting her know how long she will have to continue waiting.

“I planned for a long wait,” she said, “but it is now just short of eight months since my retirement date.”

She, like Shawn and Laura, retired from the IRS. Her career lasted more than 25 years. I mentioned some of the possible reasons for her case being delayed, such as being hung up in the Court Ordered Benefits Branch at OPM, but she stated that she has been married for more than 40 years and has never been divorced.

I mentioned that paper applications take longer to process. However, she applied using the new ORA. It appears that the hang-up, like the others, hasn’t been with OPM, but with her payroll provider, NFC.

She hasn’t received any interim retirement benefits or other communications from OPM. It is possible that her retirement package has not yet been submitted to OPM.

Stacy retired from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), where she worked for eight years after spending 18 years working for the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

NFC does the payroll for USCIS under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). She is more fortunate than some of the others, since her retirement landed at OPM much earlier. She received her Civil Service Active (CSA) number in November 2025, and she has been receiving interim retirement payments and still is in interim pay as of this week.

When she called OPM, she was told they were waiting on an NFR from June 1999 to December 2001. Stacy was not sure what they needed. They told her that OPM had asked her former employer to provide this information.

Her retirement has been assigned to a Legal Administrative Specialist (LAS) at OPM, but they won’t share the name or contact information.

Her former agency informed her everything was sent, including all her Individual Retirement Records (IRR). The Individual Retirement Record (SF 2806/SF 3100) is maintained by the agency for each employee subject to CSRS or FERS.

The Individual Retirement Record is used by OPM as the basic record for determining the retirement benefits payable to a separated employee or his or her survivors. It is, therefore, important that each SF 2806 and SF 3100 be correct, complete, clear in every detail, and properly certified so that, when the record is received in OPM, claims may be processed expeditiously.

Stacy is frustrated with the lack of transparency and seeing so many others who are receiving full retirement while she is stuck in a holding pattern. It appears that the holdup is with her payroll provider, which, as you may have guessed, is NFC.

Stacy learned that her HR office contacted NFC and sent the missing information on Nov. 3, 2025. They were told the information was sent along with a register number. A Register and Separations Report is sent to OPM by each payroll provider.

Payroll offices are required to send the register number and date to the separated employee, indicating that the payroll office has completed their separation from the former agency.

She sent a request for information to OPM’s general email, hoping they would get it. The generic response she received, however, is a “do not reply” email.

The last employee who contacted me recently only wants to be identified as a Sept. 30 retiree from the Department of State, where she has worked since 1999.

She previously served for nine and a half years in the military and “bought back” the military service, giving her a long career of more than 36 years, which would be a full career of federal service by any definition.

Initially, things went well, as she received her OPM CSA number and started to receive interim retirement payments within two months of her retirement. By February, she learned that her case had not been assigned to an LAS yet.

No one has reached out to her, and her help requests have not received a response. She calls OPM almost daily but rarely gets through.

She was divorced, but it was prior to her civilian federal service and does not believe that this could be the cause of the delay in processing. She submitted her retirement application last May using GRB software, not the new ORA system.

She submitted all the documentation required, proving she paid her military service credit deposit, along with her DD-214, her discharge certificate for her active duty.

She is without a clue as to when she will be made “whole” and said that this delay is causing her family a severe financial hardship.

She took the Voluntary Early Retirement at age 54 and did not turn 55 until 2026. This means that the withdrawals she has needed to take from her TSP account are subject to an early withdrawal penalty of 10%, in addition to the regular income tax she must pay in the year she receives the payments.

Legal Administrative Specialist

According to an OPM job posting, an LAS employee at OPM is responsible for processing claims, reviews and program evaluations intended to maintain the integrity of retirement benefits arising under the federal retirement systems and enunciation of program policy.

They are the employees responsible for adjudicating and/or making determinations of eligibility and entitlement on cases of retirement annuities and survivor benefits.

They analyze records and imaged documents to make decisions that may involve any feature of eligibility for retirement benefits or for health and life insurance benefits related to retirement.

They may also act on allegations of fraud or impropriety concerning the receipt of payments or benefits under retirement programs.

They respond to inquiries from congressional sources, agency and union officials, retirees and survivors. They also assist employees with higher salary grades in the preparation of regulation packages, bill reports, drafting of instructional issuances or similar material.

Providing advisory and information services to agencies through formally established channels on legislative changes. The estimated salary range for this position is $39,226 to $50,492.

As I have shown in these examples, the delays may stem from the HR office or the payroll providers that were buried under mountains of separations and retirements that had to be processed at the same time.

When a federal employee resigns or retires, the payroll office is responsible for processing final pay, issuing lump-sum payments for unused annual leave and certifying retirement records for OPM. They calculate and pay out unused annual leave, often within four to six weeks, audit leave accounts and submit the Individual Retirement Records to OPM.

Why do some cases move quickly while others sit?

In my experience, retirement processing is less like flipping a switch and more like closing out a file with dozens of tabs. One missing document or unresolved question can stop forward progress.

Common culprits include late or incomplete payroll certifications, missing service history, unposted deposits or redeposits for prior service, unresolved military service credit, periods of leave without pay that need to be documented, name discrepancies, incomplete beneficiary or survivor elections, or court orders that require special handling.

None of these problems are rare, and when thousands of cases arrive at once, the odds go up that more people land in the exception pile.

According to OPM’s “Retirement Processing Quick Guide,” these are the factors that might delay your retirement processing. While most retirement cases will be straightforward, certain circumstances can significantly delay the process, including:

Court orders such as a divorce decree or property settlement. These require an additional step and are sent to the Court Order Benefits Branch for review.

Service as a law enforcement officer, firefighter, air traffic controller, Capitol Police, Supreme Court Police or nuclear materials courier, as these cases use a special annuity computation.

Past or active workers’ compensation claims.

Service as a part-time or intermittent federal employee.

Federal service at multiple federal agencies.

Missing documents and forms, or incomplete or incorrect information in your retirement application.

Moving without updating your address with OPM.

Even when everything is perfect on the employee’s side, the reality is that OPM and agency partners are balancing staffing, training and competing priorities — while retirees are balancing mortgages, insurance premiums and everyday life.

A delay of a few weeks can be irritating. A delay of several months can be destabilizing.

What makes this especially hard is the information gap. Retirees often don’t know whether their case is waiting in their former agency, sitting in a queue at OPM or stuck because of a specific missing item from the payroll provider that nobody has clearly explained.

What you can do while you wait

If you retired and you have not received payments, or you are receiving interim payments that don’t look right, here are a few practical steps that can help you diagnose where the delay is and, in some cases, speed up resolution:

Confirm that your separation was processed correctly. Ask your former HR or payroll office whether your retirement package was submitted to OPM and on what date.

Ask whether your Individual Retirement Record, SF 2806 for CSRS or SF 3100 for FERS, has been certified and forwarded. If it’s still at the agency, OPM can’t finalize what it doesn’t have.

Request the missing item list in plain language. If your case is pending because of military deposit documentation, a redeposit or a court order, you need to know exactly what is being requested and where to send it.

Keep a simple contact log: date, phone number or email, who you spoke with and what you were told. It helps when you follow up or request that your case be escalated.

If you’re in interim pay status, compare what you’re receiving to your estimated annuity. Interim pay is often lower, but if it is dramatically lower, it may signal that OPM is missing service or hasn’t credited key items.

If the delay is creating a cash flow crunch, think carefully about any bridge income you use while you wait. Many retirees tap the TSP, savings or part-time work to cover the gap.

That can be a reasonable short-term fix, but be mindful of withholding and taxes, and remember that pulling from the TSP earlier than planned can change the long-term trajectory of your retirement income. If you’re unsure, a tax professional or fee-only financial planner can help you run the numbers.

If you are getting nowhere, escalation is appropriate, but it works best when you bring specifics. Start with OPM’s Retirement Services and ask whether your case is received, in pay status or waiting on something from your former agency.

If OPM indicates the issue is on the agency side, go back to your HR or payroll office and ask for the status of the exact item OPM says is missing.

If weeks pass with no movement, a congressional inquiry can sometimes help surface where a case is stuck, especially when the problem is a missing document or an unanswered request between offices. It won’t guarantee instant processing, but it can improve visibility and accountability.

What I keep hearing from the 9/30/25 retirees is not just frustration, it is fatigue.

People did what they were supposed to do. They submitted paperwork, attended pre-retirement counseling, verified service history and planned budgets around an expected start date.

When the annuity doesn’t show up, retirees are forced into a holding pattern: delaying travel, postponing home repairs and rethinking health and family expenses.

And because the process is opaque, many begin to worry that they made a mistake, when the reality may be that their file is simply one of many thousands that are moving through a bottleneck.

Ultimately, this is why retirement processing delays are more than an administrative headache. They are a real-world test of whether the system can deliver a promise earned over a career of service.

OPM employees and agency payroll teams can’t solve a surge with good intentions alone. They need staffing stability, modernized processes and clear handoffs that reduce exception cases.

In case you were wondering, the number of TSP participants with account balances over $1 million is 184,532, and these participants have an average of close to 28 years of contributions.

The number of participants with less than $50,000 in their TSP accounts is 4,200,274, and these people only have an average of a little more than six years of contributions.

]]>

DHS to again stop paying employees in May if shutdown continues

Eric Katz — Wed, 22 Apr 2026 16:07:36 -0400

The Homeland Security Department will run out funds to continue paying employees next month, the agency’s head said this week, opening the possibility for the DHS to resume normal shutdown activities as the lapse carries on into its third month.

President Trump earlier this month signed a memorandum to order the immediate pay for the ongoing work DHS employees are doing during the shutdown, as well as back pay they earned since the department’s funding lapsed on Feb. 14. More than 100,000 employees who had either been working without pay or furloughed quickly began receiving their checks, while the majority of DHS employees have been paid throughout the shutdown using previously appropriated funds.

DHS spends $1.6 billion on payroll every two weeks, Mullin said on Fox News on Tuesday, and the leftover funds from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that the department has been tapping into are set to run dry after the first pay period in May.

“There is no more emergency fund,” Mullin said. “So the president can't do another executive order for us to use money because there's no more money there.”

Normally, around 92% of DHS employees work during a shutdown without immediate pay, while the remaining part of the workforce is placed in furlough status and sent home. After Trump signed his order, however, DHS recalled all of its furloughed employees back into active status, according to a memorandum obtained by Government Executive. Mullin did not specify what would happen to those employees when existing funds run out next month, though they are likely to be placed back into furlough status.

“DHS is using available funds to ensure employees are paid,” agency leadership told employees earlier this month. “Should the department exhaust currently available funds before an FY 2026 appropriation for DHS is enacted, you will receive a new notification of your work status at that time.”

The shutdown has now dragged on for more than two months and entered its 67th day on Wednesday, by far the longest lapse—either governmentwide or more targeted—in history. Late last month, the Senate unanimously approved a negotiated agreement to fund all non-immigration DHS agencies. The House has so far refused to bring the bill up for a vote, with some members suggesting Republicans would wait until Congress makes progress on funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection to do so.

Senate Republicans took a first step to approving the funding for Trump’s immigration crackdown on Tuesday when it advanced a procedural motion to kick off the process known as budget reconciliation. The lawmakers are looking to use reconciliation to approve multi-year funds for ICE and CBP without requiring any Democratic support, though the a quick resolution is still not expected. Mullin said funding those agencies for the remainder of Trump’s term would enable them to function without risk of further shutdowns.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said on Wednesday that Republicans were intentionally keeping the Transportation Security Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Coast Guard and other “law-abiding” DHS agencies shut down despite Democrats agreeing to fund them.

“Republicans are at each other’s throats, tying their party up in knots,” Schumer said. “Democrats stand united, and we stand firm.”

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., predicted his party’s new plan would finally bring an end to the current standoff.

“We have a multistep process ahead of us, but at the end Republicans will have helped ensure that America’s borders are secure and prevented Democrats from defunding these important agencies,” Thune said.

]]>

OPM proposes hazard pay for more federal firefighting activities

Erich Wagner — Tue, 21 Apr 2026 18:07:22 -0400

The Office of Personnel Management proposed new regulations last week that would increase the pay that federal wildland firefighters receive when they work on prescribed burns.

The federal government for years has struggled to attract and retain employees to fight wildfires. Prior to the Biden administration, many made less than $15 per hour, well below similar jobs working for state and local governments.

That changed, thanks to a provision of the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law, which allocated money to boost firefighter salaries by $20,000 per year or 50% of their base pay, whichever was lower. That temporary pay increase was extended multiple times before lawmakers made it permanent in March 2025.

In new proposed regulations published in the Federal Register last week, OPM sought to further improve the pay of federal wildland firefighters by stipulating that they are entitled to hazardous duty pay—a 25% bump—for hours they work on prescribed, or planned, burns. Prescribed burns are an exercise in which a fire is set intentionally to ignite decaying forest material, in the hopes of mitigating the risk of an uncontrolled wildfire in the future.

The proposal came at the request of the Agriculture and Interior departments, which together employ most federal wildland firefighters, and would similarly impart a 25% environmental differential pay increase for Federal Wage System employees. The Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee, which oversees FWS pay policy, recommended granting hazard pay in connection with controlled burns in 2024.

OPM said that while ordinarily, hazard pay applies only to unsafe conditions not included in an employee’s position description, an exception exists for firefighters due to the health risks inherent in the job. Federal firefighters are already eligible for hazard or environmental differential pay in connection with fighting unplanned wildfires.

“Per USDA and DOI, duties associated with prescribed fire activities include ignition, fireline construction, holding, snag felling, and mop-up,” OPM wrote. “As in wildfire suppression, prescribed burns expose firefighters to physical, chemical and biological hazards with short- and long-term health risks . . . Working directly on the fireline next to a spreading fire, firefighters are exposed to open flame, radiant and convective heat, and smoke throughout implementation. After ignition, patrol and mop-up can continue for days, involving water or foam application, digging out hot material, and felling fire-weakened trees. Smoke exposure peaks during ignition and early mop-up.”

Comments on the proposed rule will remain open until June 13. In a statement, National Federation of Federal Employees National President Randy Erwin applauded OPM for acting on his union’s 2022 recommendation to approve hazard pay for prescribed fire activities.

“This is yet another step in the right direction to ensuring federal wildland firefighters receive the pay they deserve for the incredible work they do protecting our communities from the wildfire crisis,” he said. “For years, NFFE has been seeking a permanent policy allowing hazard pay for prescribed fire activities. We have explored legal options, legislation and regulatory action, and after many sustained efforts by NFFE members campaigning for change, it appears this goal is finally within reach.”

]]>

Senators demand OPM withdraw plan to access feds’ medical records

Erich Wagner — Mon, 20 Apr 2026 10:00:00 -0400

A group of 16 Democratic senators on Monday called on the Office of Personnel Management to withdraw its plan to collect claims-level health data from federal workers and retirees, expressing “grave concern” that the measure would violate the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and basic tenets of doctor-patient confidentiality.

Last December, OPM published an information collection request in the Federal Register that would require insurers who participate in the Federal Employee Health Benefits and Postal Service Health Benefits programs to provide monthly reports with identifiable health data on their enrollees, prompting unease from both health ethicists and health care providers alike. The notice would require the collection of medical visits, prescriptions and treatment data, and fails to task insurance carriers with redacting personally identifiable information.

In a letter to OPM Director Scott Kupor on Monday, more than dozen senators, led by Sens. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Mark Warner, D-Va., demanded the agency rescind its request, arguing that the agency’s general “oversight” rationale is insufficient, given the extraordinary nature of OPM’s request.

“Such sweeping access to personal health information would violate the core principles of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, which was enacted to strictly regulate how protected health information can be disclosed to ensure that patient data is shared only for limited, clearly defined purposes,” they wrote. “Mass, centralized access to identifiable medical records absent individualized consent, clear necessity or narrowly tailored legal authority undermines those protections and lacks a valid statutory basis.”

And, following more than a year of attempts by the Trump administration to cut the federal workforce with terminations and incentivized resignations and retirements, the lawmakers said claims-level data could be used to further target employees and their families.

“Since January 2025, federal employees have been pushed into early retirement, illegally fired, demonized, seen their civil service protections weakened, and more,” they wrote. “This proposal is another step in the stated goal of traumatizing the federal workforce, this time by requiring the most sensitive health information about federal employees and their families to be shared with OPM. We are deeply concerned this information will be used in employment actions, including actions related to hiring, suitability determinations, appeals, reductions in force, disability accommodation requests, labor-management relations and performance reviews.”

In a statement this month, American Federation of Government Employees National President Everett Kelley noted claims-level data could allow the administration to continue its crusade against transgender Americans.

“Legal experts have already noted that this data could be used to discipline or target workers who are not complying with the administration’s political directives,” he said. “It could be used to identify employees who have sought care that this administration has made a specific target of its policy agenda, including reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment. And it would be held by an agency that, in 2015, suffered one of the largest federal data breaches in American history, compromising the personal records of roughly 22 million people.”

Last week, Rep. Robert Garcia, D-.Calif., the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Reform Committee, along with some Maryland and Virginia Democrats sent their own letter to Kupor and Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought demanding OPM halt its efforts to collect federal workers and retirees’ health care data, noting that the lack of published safeguards on the data raise additional concerns in light of the 2015 hack and alleged disclosures to the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency.

“Last year, OPM reportedly allowed a server of unknown nature and origin to be added to its network and access sensitive government data,” the House lawmakers wrote. “A few months, later, DOGE employees inside OPM reportedly sent highly sensitive electronic files to internet protocol addresses outside of the federal government, potentially allowing private actors or adversarial governments to access sensitive data. By collecting data currently held by 65 insurance carriers into one database, expanding OPM’s access to employee data to include detailed personal health information would significantly heighten the risk of misuse, unauthorized disclosure, or exploitation by bad actors.”

Rather than including the detailed list of questions with which lawmakers typically conclude their letters to agencies, Monday’s letter ends with a simple plea to reverse course.

“For these reasons, we strongly urge you to cease any further consideration of this proposal,” the senators wrote. “Our federal employees work every day to serve the American people and deserve to have their health data protected. Protecting patient privacy is not a bureaucratic obstacle, but a cornerstone of ethical medicine, legal compliance, and public trust.”

OPM declined to comment for this story.

]]>

When retirement calculations don’t move on the same timeline

Tammy Flanagan — Thu, 16 Apr 2026 15:00:00 -0400

One of Henry Ford’s famous quotes, “Coming together is a beginning; keeping together is progress; working together is success,” describes how the business of providing retirement counseling to federal employees should work.

In the 40-plus years I’ve been helping federal employees through the process of retirement, I have learned from many experts along the way.

The late Mike Causey, one of my heroes in this business, wrote a column more than 26 years ago in The Washington Post titled “In-House Personnel Helpers Are Harder to Find.” The column began: “Downsizing has reduced the number of personnel specialists available to help federal workers get the most from their benefits package. Buyouts and early retirements also have taken away some of the most experienced people in the shrinking field of human resources, which provides counseling to workers on health and life insurance and retirement planning.”

He could have written that same column today, don’t you agree?

Although there are still experienced and caring retirement specialists throughout the federal government, many are overwhelmed by the volume of retirements they process in their agencies, and some lack the depth of experience needed to provide effective assistance. They can call the Office of Personnel Management for help; however, many employees still rely on resources like this column and outside experts to prepare for retirement.

Fortunately, I am honored to have colleagues with vast experience in this area, and I can turn to them when I need help answering questions from federal employees and annuitants.

I have a saying: “No one on this earth knows everything there is to know about federal retirement benefits.”

When a recent question stumped me, I knew just who to contact for help.

Allen, a reader of this column, wrote recently:

“I have never seen an article addressing this, so I will ask here. The USPS newest union contract was settled in April 2025. However, the Office of Personnel Management already had my monthly annuity configured on my last high-3 years prior to those new wage rates being instituted and back pay received in August 2025.

“So, I let OPM know that they needed to subtract my COLA computed for 2025 pension and then refigure my high-3 with the new contract rates and reassess my correct annuity. So far, I’ve sent two letters to OPM, and nothing has been done.

“However, in a discussion with one of the OPM reps, she agreed with my analysis and said OPM needed to correct this oversight before processing other future retirees so it can avoid additional administrative work in the future.”

I understood the question involved a retroactive pay increase dating back before Allen’s retirement. It makes sense that the increased pay rates should be included in his high-3, but I was not sure how the correction would be handled. Given the current volume of retirement applications, any adjustment could take time.

To find clarity, I first reviewed information from the National Association of Letter Carriers regarding the newest Postal Service union contract.

In 2025, the Postal Service implemented the first six wage increases under the 2023–2026 National Agreement. These include four cost-of-living adjustments and two general wage increases. Career letter carriers will receive full back pay covering the period between Aug. 26, 2023 — the effective date of the first COLA — and April 18, 2025.

Next, I turned to my longtime colleague, Joni Montroy, who specializes in helping postal workers retire across the country. She explained: “A retiree does not have to ask. The Postal Service sends registers to the Office of Personnel Management when retroactive pay is issued, including retiree names and salary adjustments. That would have occurred after August 2025 for the National Association of Letter Carriers.

“It can take up to a year after the Office of Personnel Management receives the information to review and adjust a retiree’s high-3. There are simply too many cases at once.”

She added that rural carriers and postal workers have also recently received similar adjustments, making the workload substantial across multiple bargaining units. Each contract settlement requires significant processing time and patience.

Postal retirees are also facing additional uncertainty beyond back pay issues.

A recent Postal Service Board of Governors report said the agency will temporarily suspend employer contributions for Federal Employees Retirement System annuities, effective April 10.

The Postal Service said the move is intended to conserve cash and preserve liquidity amid ongoing financial strain, with potential insolvency projected as early as February 2027.

Employee contributions to FERS will continue to be withheld and transmitted to OPM. Employer automatic and matching contributions, as well as Thrift Savings Plan and Social Security contributions, will also continue.

The Postal Service said there will be no immediate impact on current or future retirees.

In response, William Shackelford, president of the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, issued the following statement:

“The U.S. Postal Service’s decision to suspend its contributions toward employee retirements is legally questionable — at best, detrimental to the future retirement security of its employees, premature given USPS does not face imminent insolvency, and only serves to delay when Congress must craft a solution to maintain USPS operations due to its financial situation.
“Federal statute 5 U.S.C. § 8423 imposes a clear obligation to make employer contributions to CSRDF. It is not clear what legal authority the Postal Service Board of Governors is claiming to make this unilateral decision to ignore that obligation.

“While this pause does not pose an immediate threat to the payment of retirement annuities, it sets a dangerous precedent for the funding of postal and federal retiree pensions. Continued failure to pay employer contributions would create an unfunded liability that would need to be addressed in the future.

“USPS is not projected to run out of cash until February 2027. That should prompt Congress to act to ensure solvency. But it does not justify this action at this time.

“Congress must consider a financially viable path forward for the Postal Service while honoring commitments to postal retirees. They should start by extending the borrowing limit, which remains capped at 1990 levels. The organization is also open to a more balanced approach to retirement and health fund investment, as long as pension payments remain guaranteed.”

]]>

VA's failure to use its new authority to boost pay for doctors draws bipartisan criticism

Eric Katz — Thu, 09 Apr 2026 16:29:48 -0400

Doctors at the Veterans Affairs Department have yet to receive a pay bump despite a recent law authorizing the increases, which has drawn bipartisan criticism from lawmakers.

Currently, VA doctors are capped at earning $400,000 per year, a restriction that has been in place for years. A measure with broad, bipartisan support—known as the Dole Act—that President Biden signed into law shortly before leaving office allowed VA to issue 300 waivers to that cap to recruit or retain staff in critical health care roles. It also allowed VA to retroactively pay employees who previously earned extra compensation but were unable to collect it because they had hit the statutory limit.

VA has yet to put forward guidance to implement the provisions, despite it taking effect last July. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif., the top Democrats on the Senate and House Veterans Affairs Committees, respectively, spearheaded a letter this week to VA Secretary Doug Collins calling the delay in implementation "unacceptable" and requesting detailed information about physician pay, current staffing levels, recruitment efforts and where things stand with the Dole Act.

In a House hearing earlier this year, Collins requested authority to pay some doctors more than the $400,000 cap, despite the law already providing it. The lawmakers said VA has provided updates to committee staff stating the delay stemmed from internal disagreements over how to distribute the waivers.

“We would welcome the opportunity to work with you to ensure maximum utilization of the authorities provided to you in this effort,” the Democratic lawmakers said. “However, we request that you genuinely prioritize recruitment and retention of VA’s workforce by discontinuing your attacks on the VA workforce and effectively and expeditiously making use of the various tools Congress has provided.”

The department has seen a net loss of medical officers since Trump took office last January, according to data maintained by the Office of Personnel Management. Around 3,300 physicians left VA in the last 15 months, while just 2,200 have joined. Collins last year spearheaded an effort to push out a total of 30,000 VA employees, which followed longstanding efforts to grow the workforce commensurate with a growth in the number of veterans eligible for department care.

“Your continuous complaints during congressional hearings about this singular barrier to recruitment only attempt to deflect accountability for your apathy and ineptitude in implementing a solution to this issue and shift blame away from your misguided policies that have doctors and health care professionals leaving the department in droves,” the Democrats said.

Quinn Slaven, a VA spokesperson, said the department is still looking to put the Dole Act provisions into practice.

“VA is working to implement this provision of the Dole Act in a way that benefits as many Veterans as possible and will respond to the lawmakers’ letter directly,” Slaven said.

The lack of implementation has also sparked concern among Republicans. Sen. Jon Husted, R-Utah, and Rep. Max MIller, R-Ohio, wrote a similar letter to Collins in November, urging the secretary to issue regulations that would enable VA to institute the higher pay caps and unwind staffing cuts. Collins originally put forward a proposal to cut 80,000 VA employees through layoffs and various incentives, but pared back the plan after it received bipartisan pushback.

“The waivers authorized under this provision will give your department the ability to not just stem the flow of physician departures from VA medical centers, but also to reverse that flow by attracting high-quality physicians from the private sector that want to answer the call to care for America’s veterans,” the lawmakers said.

The caps previously drew bipartisan attention and Biden administration officials said lifting them was a “top priority.” President Biden signed the PACT Act into law in 2022, which enabled VA to raise pay caps for nurses which led to 10,000 workers receiving a raise.

Collins has rejected the notion that VA needs more staff, recently telling Congress that “throwing employees” at the department’s problems creates “more bureaucracy, more overhead” that leads to “slowing down and actually removes folks from actually supporting our veterans.”

After boasting of its efforts to shed 30,000 employees and installing new caps on staffing levels across the country, however, the Veterans Affairs Department said in its recently released budget that it is looking to add 9,000 employees in fiscal 2027, a growth of 2%. Most of those hires will go to medical services.

]]>

How to ensure your federal retirement benefit is correct

Tammy Flanagan — Thu, 09 Apr 2026 15:00:00 -0400

Over 33,000 retirement claims were processed at the Office of Personnel Management's Retirement Operations Center in January and February this year, according to the agency. The digital claims that were processed in February were finished in 34 days, and paper claims were processed in 95 days. This processing time begins when OPM receives your application from your agency. About one-half of February’s 31,240 new retirement claims were digital and the remaining 15,746 were paper. To learn more about how your retirement is processed, visit the following pages of OPM's website:

OPM Retirement Quick Guide
Retirement Processing Times
How OPM is Preparing for the Surge in Retirements FAQ
Retirement Processing Status Statistics
Check Your Interim Pay Status
Also on Services Online you can find your annuity statements, 1099-Rs, adjust your tax withholdings, make direct deposit changes, update your contact information and verify your life insurance (FEGLI).

It pays to know how much your gross and net annuity amounts should be before you retire! Your FERS retirement benefit is computed using a deceptively, simple formula:

One percent of your “high-three” average salary, times your years and months of creditable service, including credit for your balance of unused sick leave.

If you retire at age 62 or older with a minimum of 20 years of service (which may include a combination of actual creditable service and your balance of unused sick leave), the factor for the computation is 1.1% instead of 1.0%, resulting in a 10% higher basic benefit.

After computing the unreduced benefit, then there may be reductions applied in the following order and will result in a reduced “gross” amount of your benefit.

Age reduction: Reduction for age when retiring under early deferred retirement or MRA + 10 provisions. There is no reduction for age for an employee who retires on a disability retirement or on an immediate annuity for employees retiring under early retirement provisions for VERA (Voluntary Early Retirement Authority), DSR (Discontinued Service Retirement) or special groups such as law enforcement officers, firefighters, etc.
Reduction:
- Reduction to provide a survivor annuity to a person with an insurable interest.
- Reduction to provide a survivor annuity to a spouse and/or former spouse(s); and/or
Alternative annuity reduction (AFA): The only employees who may now elect the AFA are those who are eligible for a non-disability annuity and who have a life-threatening affliction or other critical medical condition.

Once your gross annuity is determined, then federal tax, state tax, court ordered apportionments and insurance premiums for FEHB, FEGLI, FEDVIP and FLTCIP may be withheld.

Learn more about court ordered benefit payments
To establish/change withholdings and allotments, visit Services Online or call the Retirement Information Office at 1-888-767-6738.
For more information on taxes, visit tax information for annuitants.
For more information on life insurance in retirement, visit life insurance coverage.
OPM publishes biweekly and monthly FEHB premiums and PSHB premiums.

You are not expected to know all of the rules for crediting your service for eligibility and computation of your CSRS or FERS retirement, but if you are not sure about whether your service is creditable or whether you must pay a deposit or a redeposit to receive credit, it is very important to find out BEFORE you separate from your federal career. Ask questions and educate yourself about the creditability of your federal service. These rules are very technical and can be complicated if you are not familiar with them.

Military service: Service that is included in your “leave” Service Computation Date that is published on your Notification of Personnel Action statements (form SF 50) is not always creditable for retirement. Here are the rules for crediting military service to your retirement:
Creditable military service: Chapter 22, CSRS and FERS Handbook
Service credit payments for post-56 military service: Chapter 23, CSRS and FERS Handbook
Benefits Administration Letter 23-105, Subject: Military service deposit eligibility notification requirement
Benefits Administration Letter 21-101, Subject: Payment of interest on post-56 military deposit or Peace Corp or VISTA service deposit with an administrative error
Benefits Administration Letter 17-101, Additional guidance on military deposits
Civilian service credit: In general, all federal and District of Columbia employment is considered creditable under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). The FERS Act provides that, with certain exceptions, service creditable under CSRS is potentially creditable under FERS. However, there are some important conceptual differences. These differences are discussed in the following chapters of the CSRS and FERS Handbook and in the Benefit Administration Letters that were issued after these chapters were published in 1998 (28 years ago!). Beware that when you see the word “general” or “generally” that means that there are exceptions!
Creditable civilian service: Chapter 20, CSRS and FERS Handbook
Service credit payments for civilian service: Chapter 21, CSRS and FERS Handbook
Benefits Administration Letters dating back to 1995

Here are some additional ways to find the answers to your questions:

Be careful when relying on secondhand information from well-meaning friends, family and coworkers! Do additional research before applying undocumented information to your situation.
If you are working with a financial advisor, be sure that they routinely work with federal employees like yourself so they may spot areas of concern when helping you plan your financial future.
If you attend a pre-retirement planning workshop, be sure to look for a reference to a resource or the law or regulation that backs up the information. Feel free to ask the presenter for references to the information presented when it may impact an important decision that you will make for your own retirement.
Organizations such as the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association have federal retirement specialists available to help members understand the value of their benefits through monthly live webinars, as well as an archived library of recent presentations, a monthly magazine and an email address to answer individual questions.
Retirees with a Civil Service Active (CSA) number can contact the Office of Personnel Management by submitting a “help request” or writing or calling Customer Service team: contact OPM.
Visit OPM's Federal Retirement Support Center.

]]>

OPM to FEHB carriers: Cut costs, MAHA style

Erich Wagner — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 17:58:28 -0400

The Office of Personnel Management instructed insurers who participate in federal and postal workers’ employer-sponsored health benefits program last week to promote a series of “well care” initiatives as an effort to reduce costs as the companies prepare their offerings for this fall’s annual open season.

The notice took the form of OPM’s annual “call letter” to companies that participate in the Federal Employees Health Benefits and Postal Service Health Benefits programs. While proposals to reduce health care spending by focusing on preventative treatments are nothing new in this process, OPM’s self-described policy goals in its 2026 letter are noteworthy in how they relate to the Trump administration’s health care agenda under Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

“In plan year 2027, OPM is expanding its vision for benefits with a stronger emphasis on the physical and mental wellness of the whole person,” the letter states. “This focus embraces individual autonomy, precision medicine and patient-centered care, and recognizes that the pursuit of mental and physical health should not be limited to the treatment of symptoms.”

Gone are cash incentives insurance companies offer families to ensure their children follow the recommended pediatric vaccine schedule. While FEHBP will still cover all “recommended” vaccines, the agency said it would put renewed emphasis on ensuring participants are informed of vaccines’ potential risks.

“Vaccination is a personal decision, and carriers must ensure that their policies do not prevent members from exercising independent judgment with respect to vaccination,” OPM wrote. “Carriers must require that providers comply with applicable informed consent laws. Providers may evaluate as to whether a vaccination is appropriate based on a patient’s medical condition or other relevant indications and discuss this with the patient as part of the informed consent process.”

On the cost front, the letter calls for insurers to require other interventions before patients may pursue GLP-1 drugs for obesity. Feds seeking a GLP-1 prescription would first have to participate in an obesity management program including intensive behavioral therapy. And OPM called for insurers to promote treatment for conception risk factors in addition to the limited assisted reproductive technology already covered by FEHBP and PSHBP.

“As part of OPM’s well care philosophy, emphasis should be placed on ensuring access to treatments for conditions that are recognized to adversely impact fertility, such as obesity, prediabetes, chronic reproductive health conditions to include male factor infertility and hypertension,” OPM wrote. “Improvement in men’s and women’s health enhances their likelihood of conceiving naturally and, for women, completing a healthy pregnancy. This approach demonstrates that low cost and health-conscious choices are often the most effective.”

John Hatton, staff vice president for policy and programs at the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, said it’s not unusual for administration’s to promote their health policy priorities—or to seek cost savings—via FEHBP. While the letter likely won’t lead to huge shifts in how insurers cover federal workers—or how doctors approach their patients—it does mark a noteworthy shift away from traditional medical interventions.

“There isn’t one thing that really stands out by itself as noteworthy, but combined the letter reflects a trend toward alternative treatments and expanding and encouraging the treatment of underlying causes rather than symptoms,” he said. “But it’s not like providers don’t already try to do that to begin with. This is a MAHA set of policies . . . but if you were expecting them to say ‘we’re banning vaccines,’ the letter is not doing that. But it does change the incentives.”

]]>

DHS employees to begin receiving paychecks this week

Eric Katz — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 12:46:07 -0400

Updated April 8 at 4:03 p.m.

Homeland Security Department employees are set to be paid by either the end of the week or, for some workers, by April 16, ending an impasse that has led them to go nearly two months without any compensation.

The paychecks will cover back pay dating to Feb. 14, when DHS funding lapsed. The department has operated under a shutdown ever since, with more than 100,000 employees either furloughed or working and not receiving immediate pay. Both groups of workers will soon receive paychecks after President Trump signed a memorandum ordering DHS to use previously appropriated funds to immediately pay the employees.

Trump previously ordered all Transportation Security Administration employees to receive immediate pay in an effort to address long wait times at airports that had resulted from a surge of employees calling out.

In a memo sent to all employees over the weekend, DHS said the workers would be paid between April 10 and April 16, depending on their financial institution. Trump’s order does not end the shutdown, however. Furloughed employees—only around 8% of the department—will remain on furlough. DHS also told employees not to submit their hours for their next paychecks until they receive further guidance.

One DHS employee who has been working without pay said there has been a "mad dash" for staff to complete there time cards in time. The announcement came as a relief to many workers who have been struggling to make ends meet.

“I've also been living off of my tax refund and only paying for what is absolutely necessary,” the employee said.

Many employees at DHS, such as most of those at Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection, have been paid on time since the shutdown’s onset because their offices are fee funded or are tapping into the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

In his memo, Trump said he was declaring an “emergency situation compromising the nation’s security” and directed DHS to “use funds that have a reasonable and logical nexus to the functions of DHS to provide each and every employee of DHS with the compensation and benefits that would have accrued to them” but for the shutdown. Trump had said he would sign that memo because the employees’ “families have suffered for too long.”

Lawmakers appeared to reach a deal to fund most of DHS last week, while Republicans would seek to approve spending for ICE and CBP through a separate process. The Senate passed the measure unanimously while on recess, but the House—which was expected to do the same—never brought the bill up for consideration. Congress is set to return next week. Democrats had held out on funding all of DHS as they sought reforms to ICE and CBP practices.

“We remain hopeful that Congress will fund the department and allow us to reopen soon and get everyone back to work,” DHS said in its message to staff. “For those who have continued working, with and without pay, your dedication to the department and the American people, ensuring we remain mission-ready, is truly remarkable.”

In his first email to staff, newly sworn-in DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin also expressed his gratitude to employees and said he “won’t rest” until DHS is fully funded.

“While the department remains shut down, this memorandum allows us to prioritize DHS’s most valuable national security asset,” Mullin said of the president’s action, “the men and women of this department who serve to keep this country safe.”

Correction: This story has been updated to correct a typo and reflect that DHS employees went nearly two months without pay.

]]>

OPM leans into 'well care' as it reshapes federal health plans for 2027

Kevin Moss — Mon, 06 Apr 2026 06:00:00 -0400

In late March, OPM released its annual call letter, including 2027 policy goals and initiatives for FEHB and PSHB carriers. The theme for next year will be “well care,” defined as “expanding [OPM’s] vision for benefits with a stronger emphasis on the physical and mental wellness of the whole person.”

While specific details depend on how carriers implement these initiatives, we’ve identified several items you’ll want to keep track of for next year.

Vaccine Access
Carriers must continue covering all vaccinations recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), including those for children and for shared clinical decision-making. All FEHB plans will continue making these recommended vaccines available without any additional cost.

Reproductive Services and Maternal Health
OPM is encouraging carriers to use screening bundles and outreach programs for women interested in becoming pregnant. They emphasize access to treatments for conditions that adversely impact fertility, including obesity, prediabetes and hypertension, to enhance the likelihood of conceiving naturally and completing a healthy pregnancy.

OPM also strongly encourages carriers to provide discounted rates for assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedures, like in vitro fertilization (IVF), if they are not covered by the plan.

Carriers are permitted to cover certified midwives, certified professional midwives and certified nurse midwives and must list these providers in their online provider directories.

Prevention and Treatment of Obesity
OPM continues to require that all FEHB plans provide at least one GLP-1 weight-loss medication and at least two additional oral anti-obesity medications (AOM). Carriers must use intensive behavioral therapy (IBT) prior to and while covering an AOM. IBT for obesity consists of:

Obesity screening for adults using body mass index (BMI)
Dietary assessment
Intensive behavioral counseling and therapy to promote weight loss through diet and exercise

From the letter: “Prior authorization for any AOM must ensure the member has demonstrated and will continue participation in lifestyle interventions meeting the rigor of IBT before initiating treatment and while on an AOM.”

Carriers must also cover IBT programs for children aged 6 or older who have a BMI higher than the 95th percentile for their age and sex. These programs can be conducted at a primary care office or at a community-centered organization.

Gender-Affirming Care
While gender-affirming care for new patients ended this year, patients who were mid-treatment were allowed to continue in 2026. Next year, all treatment for gender-affirming care will end while still allowing for mental health services with licensed mental health providers.

TrumpRx
OPM mentions the TrumpRx initiative in the call letter and “encourages carriers to educate members” on price transparency. Currently, TrumpRx offers a limited selection of brand-name prescription drugs.

Federal employees can take advantage of the offers available on TrumpRx, but consider the following before you do so:

Any drugs purchased through TrumpRx will be paid in cash outside your FEHB plan, and those expenses will not go toward your deductible or catastrophic limit.
You may not always find a lower price on TrumpRx compared to your FEHB prescription drug coverage, so use your carrier’s price tool to see what you are currently paying to determine if there are savings.
When comparing, make sure you use your medication’s correct form, dosage and quantity to ensure an apples-to-apples price comparison.
Federal employees who can’t get GLP-1 weight-loss drugs approved in their FEHB plan can use TrumpRx for access to some of those medications.

Site of Care Optimization
To reduce costs, OPM is encouraging carriers to optimize the site of care where clinically appropriate. This includes reviewing their claims to identify strategies that ensure members receive their medically necessary services in the most efficient and cost-effective settings. OPM provides examples of freestanding, home-based and physician office-based infusion centers offering savings compared to outpatient hospital departments.

Digital Therapeutics
OPM encourages carriers to offer proven and cost-effective digital therapeutics as a complement to traditional treatments that may offer ways to manage or improve health conditions through software or other digital health technologies.

The Final Word
Besides these initiatives, federal employees may also see increased wellness incentives from their FEHB plans next year. OPM is strongly encouraging carriers to review their current programs and expand offerings.

Open Season gives federal employees and annuitants the opportunity to reassess whether their current plan still meets their needs. In addition to any new wellness offerings, be sure to review how the premium and benefits are changing in your current plan, as well as prescription drug coverage and access to providers. Carefully reviewing Section 2 of the official FEHB plan brochure, along with information on the carrier’s website, can help you make a more informed choice during Open Season this fall.

Kevin Moss is a senior editor with the Guide to Health Plans for Federal Employees provided by Consumers’ Checkbook. Watch more of his free advice and check here if the Guide is available for free from your agency. You can also purchase the Guide and save 20% with promo code GOVEXEC.

]]>

Trump’s budget calls for 2027 pay freeze

Erich Wagner — Fri, 03 Apr 2026 13:35:10 -0400

Updated at 3:30 p.m. ET.

President Trump's fiscal 2027 budget proposal, released Friday morning, would freeze federal civilian employees' pay in 2027, all while granting a sizeable raise for members of the armed services.

An Office of Management and Budget spokesperson told Government Executive that under Trump's budget, civilian workers would receive no pay increase next January. But under the plan, members of the military would receive between a 5% and 7% pay increase, with the highest raises going to the lowest ranked personnel.

“The administration recognizes the importance of America’s warfighters and their families, so the budget funds a military pay raise of 7% for all [Defense Department] military personnel ranked E-5 and below, 6% for E-6 to O-3, and 5% for O-4 and above,” the document states. “This enduring investment, far above the standard annual military pay raise, builds on the president’s recruiting and retention success, by doubling down on the administration’s goal to restore America’s fighting force.”

In order to follow through on his pay freeze plan, Trump must submit an "alternative pay plan" to Congress by August to avert sizeable automatic increases in locality pay due to the 1990 Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act, an annual exercise from presidents of both parties since the law’s passage.

Last spring, the Office of Management and Budget told agencies through internal “pass back” documents to expect a pay freeze for 2026, but Trump's alternative pay plan ultimately advanced a 1% across-the-board raise for most civilian workers, and a 3.8% raise for select federal law enforcement occupations, in line with the pay increase seen in the military.

Democrats in Congress, conversely, have proposed a 4.1% raise for civilian feds, split between a 3.1% across-the-board increase in basic pay and an average 1% boost to locality pay.

]]>

Trump says he’ll pay all DHS workers after House again fails to end 48-day shutdown

Erich Wagner — Thu, 02 Apr 2026 17:24:07 -0400

President Trump on Thursday said he plans to sign an executive order to pay all Homeland Security Department workers, after the House failed again to pass legislation ending the partial government shutdown, now in its 48th day.

The move, which Trump announced on his social media platform Truth Social, follows a similar edict issued last week authorizing pay for Transportation Security Administration workers, who had been previously forced to work without pay amid the party-line standoff over funding Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection, the two agencies most central to the president’s immigration crackdown.

“…I will soon sign an order to pay ALL of the incredible employees at the Department of Homeland Security,” he wrote. “Their families have suffered for too long.”

It is unclear when Trump will sign the order, or upon what authority he would seek to pay thus-far unpaid DHS workers. The president signed executive orders Thursday afternoon, but as of press time they were confined to tariff-related issues.

TSA workers were granted four weeks’ worth of back pay Monday following the signing of the more targeted edict last week, while ICE and CBP workers have been paid on time since the beginning of the department-wide appropriations lapse using funds from the One Big Beautiful Bill law. Still working without pay within the department are employees at the Federal Emergency Management Agency along with support staff and other non-immigration-related DHS components.

Observers had anticipated Thursday to serve as the potential end of the six-week impasse. After the House rejected a Senate-passed bill to fund DHS—minus ICE and CBP—through the end of September last week, senators again passed the bill with the expectation that the House would approve it via unanimous consent that morning. But when the House convened its pro forma session, lawmakers did not bring the measure up for consideration, reportedly due to pressure from conservative GOP members.

The next possible opportunity for Speaker Mike Johnson to advance the DHS legislation would be Monday. The House is not set to return to Washington until April 14.

]]>

Traveling soon? What federal health plans actually cover

Tammy Flanagan — Thu, 02 Apr 2026 15:00:00 -0400

It’s the peak tourist season in Florida thanks to our sunny and warm weather and surprisingly low humidity this time of year. Saturday, March 21, was the busiest day of the year at our local Sarasota Bradenton International Airport (SRQ), with up to 16,000 departing passengers — nearly double the daily average of 8,020 — airport officials told the Herald-Tribune — our local newspaper. That would mark the airport’s second-busiest day on record. With so many people traveling, I thought it might be time to review your health insurance coverage and how it works when you are traveling out of town or out of the country. It’s important to know how your insurance plan works should you need care during an emergency when you are traveling overseas. Here are some of the important features to look for:

Are you responsible for converting the currency to dollars and translating the bills into English? You can find out by reviewing your plan brochure (generally this information is found in Section 7) or by contacting your plan’s customer service.
Be prepared to pay up front if you need care. Your insurance coverage is likely to reimburse you, but not until after you file the claim.
Most plans will reimburse at the in-network level of coverage when you travel overseas.
Note if there is a special number you will need to call if you are traveling outside of the U.S.
If you are enrolled in a Medicare Advantage option of your FEHB plan, be sure to contact the plan to see how coverage will work overseas.

If you have FEHB coverage, do you still need to purchase travel insurance?

The coverage that is available with commercial travel plans varies from one plan to another, but the best annual travel insurance plans include protection for common mishaps. Your FEHB (and PSHB) plans generally cover medical emergencies while you’re traveling. The one thing that most health plans don’t cover is a medical evacuation back to the U.S. This is sometimes referred to as a “repatriation benefit.” Check for travel plans that cover this benefit.

Travel insurance also covers non-medical problems such as unexpected cancellations and trip interruption benefits. Check your policy for coverage for baggage delays, loss, theft and damage. Travel delay benefits may reimburse you for meals, accommodation and other expenses during a covered delay. If you rent a car, your policy may have car rental protection. Some plans include additional benefits, such as business equipment coverage and change fee coverage.

Let’s look at the nationwide FEHB fee-for-service plans, some of the larger HMOs and Medicare.

APWU:

Outside the U.S.: For covered services you receive by providers and hospitals outside the United States and Puerto Rico, send a completed Claim Form and the itemized bills to the following address. Also, send any written inquiries concerning the processing of overseas claims to:

High Option: APWU Health Plan, P.O. Box 8660, Elkridge, MD 21075

Consumer Driven Option: UnitedHealthcare at the claims address shown on the back of your UnitedHealthcare ID card.

Note: Overseas claims, including emergency claims, will be paid as out-of-network.

Nationwide coverage: You can get care from any “covered provider” or “covered facility.” How much APWU will pay — and you pay — depends on the type of covered provider or facility you use. If you use preferred providers, you will pay less. APWU uses UnitedHealthcare PPO providers. When out of your state of residence, if you do not use a UnitedHealthcare PPO provider or a UnitedHealthcare PPO provider is not available, standard non-PPO benefits apply. For assistance in identifying a provider in the network, call the APWU Health Plan at 800-222-2798.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield Service Benefit Plan:

Outside the U.S.: If you travel or live outside the United States, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, you are still entitled to the plan benefits. Unless otherwise noted in the plan’s brochure, the same definitions, limitations and exclusions also apply. Costs associated with repatriation from an international location back to the United States are not covered. We may request that you provide complete medical records from your provider to support your claim. If you plan to receive healthcare services in a country sanctioned by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, your claim must include documentation of a government exemption under OFAC authorizing care in that country.

Please note that the requirements to obtain precertification for inpatient care and prior approval for those services listed in the plan brochure do not apply when you receive care overseas, except for admissions to residential treatment centers and skilled nursing facilities. Prior approval is required for all non-emergent air ambulance transport services for overseas members. Protections offered under the No Surprises Act do not apply to overseas claims. Members enrolled in the FEP Medicare Prescription Drug Program have no coverage for drugs obtained and/or purchased overseas. Please visit www.fepblue.org/overseas-coverage for additional information.

BC/BS has a network of participating hospitals overseas that will file your claims for inpatient facility care for you — without an advance payment for the covered services you receive. We also have a network of professional providers who have agreed to accept a negotiated amount as payment in full for their services. The Overseas Assistance Center can help you locate a hospital or physician in our network near where you are staying. You may also view a list of our network providers on our website, www.fepblue.org. You will have to file a claim to us for reimbursement for professional services unless you or your provider contacts the Overseas Assistance Center in advance to arrange direct billing and payment to the provider.

Nationwide coverage:

Under Standard Option, you can go to any covered provider you want, but in some circumstances, we must approve your care in advance. How much BC/BS pays — and you pay — depends on the type of covered provider you use. If you use our Preferred, Participating or Member providers, you will pay less.

Under Basic Option, you must use Preferred providers to receive benefits, except under situations listed in Section 4 of the plan brochure. In addition, we must approve certain types of care in advance. Under Basic Option, you must use those “covered professional providers” or “covered facility providers” that are Preferred providers for Basic Option to receive benefits. Please read further in Section 4 of the plan brochure for exceptions to this requirement.

You must use those “covered professional providers” or “covered facility providers” that are Preferred providers for FEP Blue Focus to receive benefits. Benefits are not available for care from non-preferred providers, except in very limited situations.

Compass Rose Health Plan:

Outside the U.S. coverage: When work or travel takes you overseas, the High and Standard Compass Rose Health Plan has you covered. You can see any health care provider or visit any hospital, and you will be reimbursed at the in-network level of benefits. When you use a provider outside the United States, you will pay them up front, then submit the receipt and detailed billing invoice for claims processing and reimbursement. Our overseas customers receive the same PPO benefits and prompt customer service as their stateside counterparts. There may be additional claims processing time for foreign claims. Claims may also be filed online. We will provide translation and currency conversion services for claims overseas and foreign services.

Optional travel insurance for Compass Rose Health Plan members:
UnitedHealthcare Global provides Compass Rose Health Plan members with access to Safe Trip travel insurance plans — an optional layer of protection designed specifically for international travel. These Safe Trip travel plans provide added protection when traveling abroad, covering unexpected trip cancellations, medical emergencies, evacuations and repatriations.

Nationwide coverage: You can get care from any “covered provider” or “covered facility.” How much we pay — and you pay — depends on the type of covered provider or facility you use. On the High Option, if you use our preferred providers, you will pay less. The Compass Rose Health Plan is powered by the UnitedHealthcare Choice Plus network. To help keep out-of-pocket costs low, our contract with UnitedHealthcare limits what doctors, hospitals and other facilities in the network are allowed to charge you. The Standard Compass Rose Health Plan does not provide coverage for out-of-network care.

Foreign Service Benefit Plan:

Who may enroll in this plan: You must be, or become, a member of the American Foreign Service Protective Association. New membership in the FSBP is limited to American Foreign Service personnel and certain Civil Service direct hire employees (i.e., eligible for FEHB insurance) working for the following government organizations: (1) Department of State (Foreign Service and Civil Service); (2) Department of Defense; (3) Department of Homeland Security; (4) USAID (Foreign Service and Civil Service); (5) Foreign Commercial Service (Foreign Service and Civil Service); (6) Foreign Agricultural Service (Foreign Service and Civil Service); (7) CIA, NSA and other intelligence organizations; and (8) Executive Branch civilian employees assigned overseas or to U.S. possessions and territories, and the direct hire domestic employees assigned to support those activities.

Outside the U.S. claims: When you are overseas you have access to a translation service, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to assist you in discussing your urgent health-related conditions (such as accidents and medical emergencies that require immediate attention) with a foreign healthcare professional. You may call 855-411-9916. The Foreign Service Benefit Plan pays claims for providers outside the 50 United States at the same in-network coinsurance rate as in-network providers in the 50 United States, except in Guam, which is part of the plan’s network and subject to in- and out-of-network benefits. Note: We will provide translation and currency conversion services for claims for overseas (foreign) services. We have direct billing arrangements with providers in many countries, including China, Colombia, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Korea, Panama, Russia, Switzerland, Thailand and Turkey. In addition, overseas Seventh-day Adventist hospitals and clinics participate in our direct billing arrangement. Please see our website (www.AFSPA.org/FSBP) for the most up-to-date information.

Nationwide coverage: You can get care from any “covered provider” or “covered facility.” We do not require referrals to see a specialist. How much we pay — and you pay — depends on the type of covered provider or facility you use. If you use in-network providers, you will pay less. The out-of-network benefits are the standard benefits of this plan. In-network benefits apply only when you use an in-network provider. Provider networks may be more extensive in some areas than others. In-network benefit levels also apply to providers outside the 50 United States.

GEHA:

Outside the U.S. claims: For covered services you receive by physicians and hospitals outside the United States and Puerto Rico, send a completed Overseas Claim Form and the itemized bills. Eligibility and/or medical necessity review is required when procedures are performed, or you are admitted to a hospital outside of the United States. Covered providers outside the United States will be paid at the in-network level of benefits, subject to the deductible, copays and/or coinsurance. We will provide translation and currency conversion for claims for overseas (foreign) services. The conversion rate will be based on the date services were rendered. You may be required to pay for the services at the time you receive them and then submit a claim to us for reimbursement. Proof of payment is required to be submitted with an overseas claim form. Canceled checks, cash register receipts or balance due statements are not acceptable. All foreign claim payments will be made directly to the enrollee.

Nationwide coverage: If you utilize an out-of-network provider, out-of-network benefits would apply on the Elevate Option. The Elevate Plus Option does not provide benefits for out-of-network providers, except in cases of emergency medical care. This plan uses the UnitedHealthcare network.

MHBP:

Outside the U.S. coverage: Overseas will be paid at the network level of benefits for covered services. Overseas hospitals and physicians are under no obligation to file claims for you. You may be required to pay for the services at the time you receive them and then submit a claim to us for reimbursement. MHBP will provide translation and currency conversion services for claims for overseas (foreign) services. For inpatient hospital services, the exchange rate will be based on the date of admission. For all other services, we will apply the exchange rate for the date the services were rendered. All foreign claim payments will be made directly to the enrollee except for services rendered to beneficiaries of the United States Department of Defense third party collection program. Canceled checks, cash register receipts or balance due statements are not acceptable.

Nationwide coverage: MHBP is a fee-for-service plan that allows you and your covered dependents to choose your health care providers. However, when you use an out-of-network provider, you may incur higher out-of-pocket expenses. The out-of-network benefits are the regular benefits of the plan. Network benefits apply only when you use a network provider. We cannot guarantee the availability of every specialty, or their continued participation in a specialty, in all areas. Out-of-network benefits are based on the plan’s out-of-network allowance. The out-of-network allowance depends on the type of care you receive, whether you receive care in an area that has a fully developed network and other factors. Aetna is the brand name used for products and services provided by one or more of the Aetna group of companies, including Aetna Life Insurance Company and its affiliates (Aetna). A single annual $52 associate membership fee makes all MHBP plans available to you.

SAMBA Health Benefit Plan:

Outside the U.S. coverage: For covered services rendered by a hospital or by a doctor outside of the United States, the plan will pay eligible charges at PPO benefit levels, limited to the plan’s allowance established for the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area. The member is responsible for the difference between the plan’s allowance and the provider’s charge. We will provide translation and currency conversion services for claims for overseas (foreign) services. Charges for overseas (foreign) claims will be converted to U.S. dollars using the exchange rate applicable to the date the service was rendered. For inpatient hospital services, the exchange rate will be based on the date of admission. When you must file a claim — such as for services you received overseas or when another group health plan is primary — submit it on the CMS-1500 or a claim form that includes the information shown in Section 7 of the plan brochure. Bills and receipts should be itemized.

Nationwide coverage: SAMBA’s fee-for-service plan offers services through a PPO. This means that certain hospitals and other healthcare providers are “preferred providers.” We have entered an arrangement with Cigna to offer the Cigna Open Access Plus (OAP) network to serve as the plan’s PPO for SAMBA enrollees in all states. When you use our PPO providers, you will receive covered services at reduced cost. The non-PPO benefits are the regular benefits of this plan. PPO benefits apply only when you use a participating Cigna OAP network provider. We cannot guarantee the availability of every specialty in all areas and continued participation of any specific provider cannot be guaranteed. When you phone for an appointment, please remember to verify that the healthcare provider or facility is still a Cigna OAP network provider. The nature of the services (such as urgent or emergency situations) does not affect whether benefits are paid as PPO or non-PPO. If you reside in the PPO network area and no PPO provider is available, or you do not use a PPO provider, the regular non-PPO benefits apply.

Aetna:

Aetna offers seven unique plan options: Aetna Saver, Open Access Plan, Aetna Value Plan, HDHP w/HAS, CDHP, Aetna Direct and Aetna Advantage.

Aetna Advantage

Outside the U.S. coverage: You should provide an English translation and currency conversion rate at the time of services for claims for overseas (foreign) services. When you must file a claim, such as when you use non-network providers, for services you receive overseas or when another group health plan is primary, submit it on the Aetna claim form.

Nationwide coverage: This plan is a health maintenance organization (HMO). We require you to see specific physicians, hospitals and other providers that contract with us. These plan providers coordinate your health care services. We are solely responsible for the selection of these providers in your area. Contact us for a copy of our most recent provider directory or visit our website at www.AetnaFeds.com. We give you a choice of enrollment in a High, Basic or Saver Option.

If you live or work in our service area, you can go directly to any network specialist for covered services without a referral from your primary care provider. Note: Whether your covered services are provided by your selected primary care provider (for your PCP copay) or by another participating provider in the network (for the specialist copay), you will be responsible for payment, which may be in the form of a copay (flat dollar amount) or coinsurance (a percentage of covered expenses). If you go directly to a specialist, you are responsible for verifying that the specialist is participating in our plan. If your participating specialist refers you to another provider, you are responsible for verifying that the other specialist is participating in our plan.

Aetna Saver, Aetna High Option, Aetna Basic Option

Outside the U.S.:
If you are traveling outside your Aetna service area, including overseas/foreign lands, or if you are a student who is away at school, you are covered for emergency and urgently needed care. For non-emergency services, care may be obtained from a walk-in clinic, an urgent care center or by calling Teladoc. Urgent care may be obtained from a private practice physician, a walk-in clinic or an urgent care center. Certain conditions, such as severe vomiting, earaches or high fever are considered “urgent care” outside your Aetna service area and are covered in any of the above settings. All follow-up care should be coordinated by your PCP or network specialist. Follow-up care with non-participating providers is only covered with a referral from your primary care provider and preapproval from Aetna. Suture removal, cast removal, X-rays and clinic and emergency room revisits are some examples of follow-up care.

Nationwide coverage: Large nationwide Aetna network, 24-hour/7-days-a-week access to doctors with CVS Virtual Care, no referrals to network specialists.

See www.aetnafeds.com for additional plans that Aetna offers, including Aetna Open Access Plan, Aetna HDHP w/HSA, Aetna CDHP and Aetna Direct plans.

Kaiser Permanente:

Outside the U.S.: Most overseas providers are under no obligation to file claims on behalf of our members. You may need to pay for the services at the time you receive them and then submit a claim to us for reimbursement. To file a claim for covered urgent or emergent care received outside the United States, send a completed Overseas Claim Form and itemized bills to: Mid-Atlantic Claims Administration, Kaiser Permanente, P.O. Box 371860, Denver, CO 80237-9998. We will do the translation and currency conversion for you. You may obtain the Overseas Claim Form by calling Member Services toll-free at 877-KP4-FEDS (877-574-3337) or from our website at www.kp.org/feds, Members/Forms and Information.

Nationwide coverage: You must receive your health services at Kaiser Permanente plan facilities, except if you have an emergency, authorized referral or out-of-area urgent care. If you are visiting another Kaiser Permanente or allied plan service area, you may receive healthcare services at those Kaiser Permanente facilities. Under the circumstances specified in this brochure you may receive follow-up or continue care while you travel anywhere. If you have an urgent care claim (i.e., when waiting for the regular time limit for your medical care or treatment could seriously jeopardize your life, health or ability to regain maximum function, or in the opinion of a physician with knowledge of your medical condition would subject you to severe pain that cannot be adequately managed without this care or treatment), we will expedite our review and notify you of our decision within 72 hours.

If your plan is not listed, you can check out all other FEHB and PSHB plans by visiting https://www.opm.gov/healthcare-insurance/healthcare/.

TRICARE:

Outside the U.S. proof of coverage: Learn how to travel. Filling prescriptions overseas: We recommend that you fill all your prescriptions before you travel. If you must fill a prescription while you’re traveling, keep in mind that TRICARE retail network pharmacies are only located in the U.S. and the U.S. territories of Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Northern Mariana Islands. Also, if you’re using home delivery, you must have a prescription from a U.S.-licensed provider and an APO or FPO address. Learn more about filling prescriptions overseas.

Air evacuations: To be medically necessary means it is appropriate, reasonable and adequate for your condition. International SOS will provide cashless, claimless air evacuation services to the closest safe location. This applies only to active-duty service members and their families. For all others, TRICARE will still cover the safest circumstances. However, you should be prepared to pay up front and submit a claim for reimbursement. TRICARE doesn’t cover all air evacuations back to the U.S. Learn more about air evacuation coverage.

Nationwide coverage: TRICARE is the uniformed services health care program for active-duty service members, active-duty family members, National Guard and Reserve members and their family members, retirees and retiree family members, survivors and certain former spouses worldwide.

TRICARE brings together the health care resources of the Military Health System — such as military hospitals and clinics — with a network of civilian health care professionals, institutions, pharmacies and suppliers to foster, protect, sustain and restore health for those entrusted to their care. You can also seek care from a civilian network of TRICARE-authorized providers. This network depends on what region you’re in. Find your region and learn more about network providers. Note: You may be able to see a non-network TRICARE-authorized provider, depending on your TRICARE plan. But you may have higher costs and you may have to file your own claims.

Medicare:

Medicare usually doesn’t cover medical care outside the U.S. and its territories. However, Original Medicare and Medicare Advantage plans must cover care you receive outside the U.S. in some very limited certain circumstances:

Medicare will pay for emergency services in Canada if you are traveling a direct route, without unreasonable delay, between Alaska and another state and the closest hospital that can treat you is in Canada.
Medicare will pay for medical care you get on a cruise ship if you get the care while the ship is in U.S. territorial waters. This means the ship is in a U.S. port or within six hours of arrival at or departure from a U.S. port.
In limited situations, Medicare may pay for non-emergency inpatient services in a foreign hospital (and any connected provider and ambulance costs). Your care is covered if the hospital is closer to your residence than the nearest available U.S. hospital. This might happen if, for example, you live near the border of Mexico or Canada.

]]>

Most TSP funds tumbled in March

Erich Wagner — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 14:50:33 -0400

Nearly all the portfolios within the federal government’s 401(k)-style retirement savings program lost ground last month, as the global economy buckles from disruptions resulting from President Trump’s bombing campaign in Iran.

The Thrift Savings Plan’s G Fund, which is made up of government securities, was the sole offering to finish March in the black, increasing by its statutorily mandated rate of 0.34%. So far in 2026, the G Fund has gained 1.04%.

The common stocks of the C Fund lost 4.98% last month, bringing its performance since January to 4.34% in the red. And the small- and mid-size businesses of the S Fund fell 4.58%, wiping out its gains this year. So far in 2026, the S Fund has lost 1.22% in value.

The I Fund, which is made up of international investments, was hardest hit in March, finishing the month 9.35% in the red. So far this year, the I Fund has gained 1.84%.

And the fixed income (F) fund lost 1.77% last month, bringing its 2026 gains down to 0.04%.

Likewise, each of the TSP’s lifecycle (L) funds, which shift toward more conservative investments as participants get closer to retirement, lost value in March. The L Income Fund, designed for people who have already begun making withdrawals, fell 1.66%; L 2030, 3.67%; L 2035, 4.29%; L 2040, 4.69%; L 2045, 5.04%; L 2050, 5.37%; L 2055, 6.40%; L 2060, 6.40%; L 2065, 6.40%; L 2070, 6.40%; and L 2075, 6.40%.

Since January, the L Income Fund has grown 0.26%, the sole L fund still in the black for 2026. The L 2030 Fund lost 0.56%; L 2035, 0.82%; L 2040, 0.99%; L 2045, 1.14%; L 2050, 1.29%; L 2055, 1.73%; L 2060, 1.73%; L 2065, 1.73%; L 2070, 1.73%; and L 2075, 1.73%.

]]>

TSA workers receive back pay after 4-week delay as DHS shutdown continues

Jacob Fischler, States Newsroom — Mon, 30 Mar 2026 17:48:42 -0400

Most Transportation Security Administration officers received a paycheck Monday covering four weeks of back wages that were held up by the funding lapse at the Homeland Security Department, a TSA spokesperson said.

The lack of pay had produced long wait lines for security checks at some of the nation’s busiest airports after TSA officers quit or called out sick.

The 45-day partial government shutdown of DHS remains ongoing — with each chamber of Congress, both led by Republicans, unable to reach a consensus on a solution. It is now the longest government shutdown in history, exceeding last year’s 43-day record.

But President Donald Trump on Friday ordered the department and the White House Office of Management and Budget to reprogram funds with a “logical nexus” to TSA in order to compensate the airport screeners who had remained on the job without pay.

That month of back pay went out Monday, DHS spokeswoman Lauren Bis wrote in an email.

“Most TSA employees received a retroactive paycheck today that included at least two full paychecks … today,” Bis wrote.

Some TSA workers “might see a slight delay,” which could be attributed to a variety of factors, such as processing by their banks, Bis added. She said the department was working with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Finance Center to process the half-paycheck employees missed in February.

Because TSA workers are considered essential, they are required by law to stay on the job even when the government cannot fund their positions. Though they receive back pay once funding is available, long shutdowns cause major problems for workers.

More than 500 TSA workers have quit since the shutdown began and thousands more have missed shifts, Bis wrote.

Breakdown in Congress

The House and Senate passed competing measures Friday to end the shutdown. Because the chambers diverged in how to fund the department, it remains shuttered.

The shutdown began Feb. 14 after Democrats in Congress said they would only support a funding bill for the department if it contained changes in how the Trump administration carried out immigration enforcement following the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens by immigration agents in Minneapolis.

Senators last week reached a deal to fund the department except for its immigration enforcement agencies, which received a massive influx from Republicans’ spending and tax cuts law last year.

The House bill would have extended 2025 funding levels for the entire department for two months. Lawmakers from both chambers left for a two-week recess after passing their respective bills.

White House wants full funding

At a Monday briefing, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt urged Congress to pass full funding for the department.

“The president just can’t keep signing presidential memorandums and proclamations every time Congress fails to do its job and every time Democrats hold our country hostage, picking and choosing the programs and agencies they want to fund just because they don’t like this administration’s policies,” she said. “That’s not how it’s supposed to work.”

Jennifer Shutt contributed to this report.

]]>

The Social Security clock is ticking faster than expected

Tammy Flanagan — Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:00:00 -0400

Did you know that the “Doomsday Clock” was founded in 1947 by scientists associated with the Manhattan Project, including Albert Einstein and J. Robert Oppenheimer? According to this “clock,” it is now 85 seconds to midnight.

Fortunately, today’s column will not focus on disruptive technologies, nuclear risk, climate change or biological threats that are the focus of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Instead, I will focus on projections of the insolvency of Social Security, including analysis from the University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM) and the official projections from the Social Security Trustees.

The official annual report of the Board of Trustees of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Federal Disability Insurance Trust Funds will not be released for a few more months. The most recent report was released on June 18, 2025.

For someone like me who looks for the silver lining in every cloud, I don’t like to make dire predictions or assume a problem cannot be solved. Today’s column discusses both the projections and the potential policy paths forward.

The PWBM analysis is grounded in microeconomics, which refers to how individuals, households and firms make decisions to allocate limited resources. In this case, the limited resource is the funds available to pay Social Security benefits to retirees, survivors and individuals who are unable to work due to disability.

The PWBM projects that Social Security could face depletion in the early 2030s under certain assumptions. At that point, available revenues would be sufficient to pay only a portion of scheduled benefits.

This aligns broadly with the Social Security Trustees’ projections, though the exact timing differs slightly depending on the assumptions used. The Trustees have projected depletion of the combined trust funds in the mid-2030s if no changes are made to current law.

The OASI and DI Trust Funds operate separately under current law. The Disability Insurance Trust Fund is generally projected to remain solvent longer than the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund. Combined projections are often used as a general indicator of the system’s overall financial status, even though the funds cannot be merged without a change in law.

According to the Trustees, several factors are contributing to the long-term imbalance. One is recent legislation that increased benefits for some workers by repealing provisions that had reduced benefits for certain public-sector employees.

Another factor is demographics. Lower birth rates mean fewer workers paying into the system in the future, while the population of beneficiaries continues to grow. The total fertility rate in the United States has declined to historic lows in recent years, contributing to this long-term pressure.

A third factor is the share of income going to wages versus other forms of compensation. Changes in that balance can affect payroll tax revenues, which fund Social Security.

Understanding these drivers is necessary to understand the policy options available to address the shortfall.

The PWBM outlines several policy levers that could address the gap, though any changes would require action by Congress. These include adjustments to the payroll tax rate, the taxable maximum, cost-of-living adjustments, benefit formulas and the full retirement age.

The combined OASDI payroll tax rate is 12.4 percent, split evenly between employers and employees. Only earnings up to a certain annual limit are subject to the payroll tax, with that taxable maximum increasing over time. Benefits are adjusted annually for inflation through cost-of-living adjustments, and the benefit formula is based on a progressive structure tied to lifetime earnings.

The full retirement age is 67 for workers born in 1960 or later, though individuals can claim reduced benefits starting at 62 or delay claiming until age 70 to receive higher monthly payments.

The PWBM presents several illustrative policy options to address the long-term imbalance. These scenarios are modeling exercises, not legislative proposals, and each combines different changes to taxes and benefits.

Option A focuses primarily on revenue increases, including a higher payroll tax rate and an increase in the taxable maximum, along with adjustments to the cost-of-living formula.

Option B combines revenue increases with modest benefit reductions by adjusting the benefit formula and cost-of-living calculations.

Option C shifts more toward benefit reductions, including a gradual increase in the full retirement age.

Option D blends both revenue increases and benefit adjustments.

Option E relies primarily on benefit reductions without increasing the payroll tax rate.

Time will tell whether any of these approaches will be adopted. The reality is that the options generally fall into three categories: raising revenue, reducing benefits or some combination of the two.

The advantage of phasing in changes over time is that it gives workers and retirees more time to adjust. Congress has acted before to stabilize Social Security, though often at the last possible moment. The question is whether it will act again before time runs out.

]]>

How federal retirement benefits have changed over the years

Tammy Flanagan — Thu, 19 Mar 2026 15:00:00 -0400

It has been more than 20 years since I began writing this “retirement planning” column and more than 40 years since I started studying federal benefits so that I could teach and counsel federal employees about their retirement and insurance benefits. As the old saying goes, “time flies when you’re having fun!” During the past four decades, I have seen changes in federal retirement and insurance benefits due to changes in laws and policies. As I look back to 1985 (the year I was assigned to work in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s “retirement office”), here are some of the changes that have stood out that impact the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), which was being created and implemented in the 1980s, and the older Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), which dates back to its creation in 1920:

Federal Employees Retirement System Act of 1986 — Title I: Federal Employees Retirement System

Establishes FERS for federal employees, postal employees and members of Congress who began service after Dec. 31, 1983. Declares that benefits payable under the system are in addition to those payable under the Social Security Act. Includes the following provisions:

Eligibility for an annuity after five years of creditable service
Entitlements to retirement based on age and years of service
Formulas for computing an annuity
Survivor election reductions
Funding

The FERS Act also provided for:

Mandatory retirement for air traffic controllers, law enforcement officers and firefighters
A Thrift Savings Plan under which participants make contributions from their basic pay
A formula to determine the appropriate contribution by the employing agency
Payment of benefits, lump sum or annuity, at separation from service
Establishment of the Thrift Savings Fund in the Treasury
Investment of funds
Survivor annuities under FERS
Disability benefits for employees with 18 months of creditable service
The Office of Personnel Management to administer benefits and adjudicate claims
Annual adjustments in basic pensions based on increases in the Consumer Price Index
Withholding of state income taxes from retirement annuities
Protection of annuities, survivor annuities and disability benefits from legal process, unless otherwise provided by federal law
Creation of the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board to oversee the Thrift Savings Fund
Creation of an Employees Thrift Advisory Council
Appointment of an executive director to carry out board policies and administer the plan

Public Law 103-353, the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA)

Approved Oct. 13, 1994, this law made two substantial amendments to FERS and CSRS provisions under Title 5. It made certain National Guard service creditable and addressed service credit deposits required for certain military service that interrupts civilian federal service. Both provisions apply to certain past service.

Bailey v. State of North Carolina (1998)

This class-action lawsuit resulted in a North Carolina Supreme Court decision that affected taxation of certain retirement benefits. As a result, North Carolina may not tax certain retirement benefits received by retirees of the state who meet specific criteria. The ruling applies to certain defined benefit plans, including FERS and CSRS, for qualifying service. It also applies to certain state retirement plans. Retirees are advised to check with their state tax office regarding how their benefits will be taxed.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Public Law 111-84)

Signed Oct. 28, 2009, this law provided several changes under CSRS and FERS, including:

Credit for unused sick leave under FERS, with phased implementation (50 percent effective Oct. 28, 2009, and 100 percent effective Jan. 1, 2014)
Expanded ability to use actuarial reductions instead of cash redeposits for certain prior service
Changes to annuity calculations for part-time service
Authority to deposit refunds under FERS
Credit for certain District of Columbia service transferred to federal service
Retirement equity adjustments for employees in non-foreign areas, allowing a phased shift from cost-of-living allowances to locality pay

Public Law 112-96, the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012

Established FERS-Revised Annuity Employee (FERS-RAE). Employees hired after Dec. 31, 2012, who were not excluded from FERS coverage became subject to higher employee contribution rates. While most benefits did not change, the law increased contributions and included exceptions allowing some employees to remain under original FERS rules.

The Social Security Fairness Act (2025)

Signed into law on Jan. 5, 2025, this act ended the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and Government Pension Offset (GPO). These provisions had reduced or eliminated Social Security benefits for millions of workers who also received pensions from non-covered employment, including many federal employees under CSRS.

Future changes

H.R. 1522, the Federal Retirement Fairness Act, would allow civilian service in temporary positions after Dec. 31, 1988, to be creditable under FERS. It has been proposed for years but has not gained broad support.
Recent proposals in the “big beautiful bill” of 2025 included potential changes to federal retirement and benefits, such as:
- Reducing the federal government’s contribution to FEHB plans through a voucher model
- Eliminating cost-of-living adjustments for FERS retirees
- Reducing COLAs for CSRS retirees by 0.5 percent
- Reducing returns on the Thrift Savings Plan G Fund
- Increasing employee retirement contributions
- Converting new employees to at-will status unless they accept higher contributions
- Charging fees for Merit Systems Protection Board appeals
- Calculating annuities based on the highest five years of salary instead of three
- Eliminating the FERS annuity supplement

Employee and retiree organizations continue to play a significant role in shaping these outcomes. Groups like AFGE and NARFE have successfully influenced legislation and helped prevent proposed cuts to federal retirement and insurance benefits.

]]>

Women in federal service still face retirement gaps

Tammy Flanagan — Thu, 12 Mar 2026 15:00:00 -0400

Updated at 4:08 p.m. on March 13.

March is Women’s History Month, a time to reflect on the achievements of women who have shaped American institutions and to examine the challenges that persist today. One area where women’s contributions — and challenges — are especially visible is retirement security. For federal employees, retirement planning is built on a strong foundation through the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS). Yet, even with this structure, women face unique hurdles that make proactive planning essential.

In 1967, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed Executive Order 11375, which added sex to other prohibited forms of discrimination in the federal government. As a result, the Civil Service Commission established the Federal Women’s Program (FWP). The program was tasked with identifying barriers that hinder hiring women and women’s career advancement in the federal government.

In 1972 the Equal Employment Opportunity Act brought federal employees fully under the equal employment opportunity provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Equal Employment Opportunity Act required that federal agencies designate a Federal Women’s Program Manager to advise the director of equal employment opportunity on matters affecting women’s employment and advancement. It also required federal agencies to allocate sufficient resources to their Federal Women’s Programs. To help implement the portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act that affected its female employees, the National Archives and Records Service (NARS) created a Federal Women’s Program Committee.

I’ve had the opportunity to present retirement planning programs to a variety of groups of female federal employees. My presentations for groups of women were really no different from any other presentations I conducted. However, I noticed that there were more frequent questions about taking time out for caregiving, whether it was for young children, parents or spouses. Caregiving duties often result in changing work schedules from full time to part time.

In some cases, women have taken a break in their service history, leaving them with shorter careers resulting in smaller retirement benefits when they returned to federal service. In some cases, refunded retirement contributions needed to be paid back (with interest) to fully credit the past service.

Federal Employed Women, or FEW, is a private, nonprofit organization founded in 1968, the year after President Johnson’s executive order was signed. Today, FEW still works to end sex and gender discrimination, to encourage diversity for inclusion and equity in the workplace, and for the advancement and professional growth of women in federal service by:

encouraging diversity and equity in the workplace
enhancing career opportunities
establishing relationships with organizations to advocate the fair application of laws, policies, procedures and practices
maintaining relationships with organizations to advocate the fair application of laws, policies, procedures and practices

Groups like FEW exist to improve the quality of life for women by influencing legislative actions, committing to maintain a unified and diverse membership and providing opportunities for professional growth.

Women in Federal Law Enforcement, or WIFLE, is another such organization that stemmed from President Johnson’s efforts to remove barriers to women in government. WIFLE’s predecessor was ICWIFLE (I C WIFLE), which is the acronym for the Interagency Committee on Women in Federal Law Enforcement hosted by the departments of Justice and Treasury.

ICWIFLE was originally formed as a task force created by the Office of Personnel Management in 1978. It was charged with studying reasons for the low numbers of women entering federal law enforcement — fields that opened to women only after President Richard Nixon signed Executive Order 11478 (EO 11478) on Aug. 8, 1969.

President Nixon’s executive order provided equal opportunity to federal employment for all persons; prohibited discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap or age; and promoted equal employment opportunity through a continuing affirmative program in each executive department and agency.

Women were not authorized to carry firearms, execute search warrants and make arrests until 1969, when Executive Order 11478 was signed.

Joanne Pierce Misko, a former nun who grew up in Niagara Falls, N.Y., and Susan Roley Malone, a 25‑year‑old Marine, became the first female FBI agents in 1972. I had the privilege of meeting Special Agent Johnnie Mae Gibson, one of the first Black female FBI agents, during the time I worked at FBI headquarters in the 1980s. Gibson served from 1976 to 1999.

In 1971 and 1972, women special agents were also hired by the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Secret Service, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

How women save compared to men

Despite remarkable gains in labor force participation, women’s economic well‑being continues to lag in key outcomes like median earnings and retirement security. Research shows that women hold fewer retirement assets and are more likely to be impoverished at the end of their lives than men.

Census Bureau data consistently show that women approach retirement with fewer financial resources than men. According to U.S. Census Bureau research in 2018, about 50% of women ages 55–66 have no personal retirement savings, compared with 47% of men in the same age group. Women are also less likely to have substantial savings: only 22% of women report retirement savings of $100,000 or more, compared with 30% of men.

Multiple studies indicate that women are disadvantaged across all sources of retirement assets: they tend to receive lower Social Security benefits, have lower retirement account ownership rates and lower estimated retirement account balances, and own fewer assets than men.

A study by researchers from the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College found that the lifetime earnings of mothers with one child are 28% less than the earnings of childless women, all else equal, and each additional child lowers lifetime earnings by another 3%.

When examining Social Security benefits, the study found that the “motherhood penalty” is smaller than the earnings penalty. But mothers with one child still receive 16% less in benefits than women without children, and each additional child reduces benefits by another 2%.

Other studies reinforce this trend. Research summarized by Investopedia shows that women often have less than one‑third of the median retirement savings of men, a gap driven by lower lifetime earnings, caregiving responsibilities and career interruptions.

Surveys also indicate that women report lower confidence in their ability to meet retirement goals than men, even when participating in employer‑sponsored plans.

For federal employees, the Federal Employees Retirement System helps offset some of these challenges by guaranteeing a pension. Still, differences in TSP contribution levels, investment growth and years of service can widen gaps over time if not actively managed.

Why women face greater retirement challenges

Elderly women, who comprise a growing portion of the U.S. population, have historically been at greater risk of living in poverty than elderly men.

This prompted a study by the Government Accountability Office in 2012, which found that women, on average, earn less over their lifetimes and are more likely to take time away from work to care for children or aging relatives. These interruptions reduce years of creditable service under FERS and lower total TSP contributions.

In 2020, the comptroller general of the United States, Gene Dodaro, head of GAO, testified about the unique challenges women face saving for retirement. Among those challenges, he noted that women have longer life spans, lower lifetime earnings and that they are more likely to be primary caregivers, which can limit them from maintaining paid employment.

Studies cited by retirement researchers show that women are more likely to express concern about longevity risk and health care costs in retirement. These realities make strategic retirement planning especially critical for women in federal service.

How women federal employees can prepare for retirement

While challenges exist, federal employment offers tools that women can leverage so they can prepare for retirement.

Preparation begins with understanding how each component of FERS fits together. Maximizing TSP participation is one of the most impactful steps. The federal government automatically contributes 1% of salary and matches additional employee contributions up to certain limits, making consistent contributions especially valuable over time. Ensuring at least enough contributions to receive the full match is widely recognized as a foundational strategy.

Women should also pay close attention to years of creditable service and retirement eligibility milestones. FERS retirement options depend on combinations of age and service, such as reaching the minimum retirement age with 30 years of service or age 60 with 20 years. Understanding these thresholds helps employees make informed decisions about when to retire and how long to remain in federal service.

Finally, retirement preparation extends beyond income. Evaluating health insurance continuation, survivor benefits and long‑term care considerations is particularly important for women, who statistically spend more years in retirement.

Looking forward

While FERS provides a solid framework, women still face disparities in savings, confidence and retirement readiness. By understanding the data, using federal benefits strategically and learning from the women who shaped today’s retirement landscape, women in federal service can turn structural advantages into lasting financial security.

In doing so, they continue a long tradition of women strengthening not only their own futures but the retirement systems that support generations to come.

What has Congress done and what can they do in the future to help equalize the retirement benefits for women?

Increase access to retirement plans (there are well over a dozen categories of federal workers who are excluded from FERS coverage, including temporary and term appointments and employees serving on an intermittent work schedule)
Improve tax incentives to save for retirement (IRS Retirement Savings Contributions Credit is a tax credit established to help taxpayers save for retirement and lower their tax bill. Beginning in tax year 2027, the Saver’s Credit will be replaced by the Saver’s Match, created by the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 for individuals meeting income and other eligibility requirements. Several provisions of SECURE 2.0 affect how participants contribute and use the TSP as well)
Expand Social Security benefits for caregivers

In 2025, Rep. Lauren Underwood, D‑Ill., and Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D‑Wis., introduced the Women’s Retirement Protection Act of 2025 (WRPA), legislation to help close the retirement gap and improve women’s financial security. There is a companion bill in the Senate, S.988, sponsored by Sen. Baldwin, D‑Wis., designed to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 to provide greater spousal protection under defined contribution plans (the TSP already provides such protection by requiring spousal consent for withdrawals by FERS and uniformed services participants).

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story incorrectly identified Johnnie Mae Gibson as the first Black female FBI agent. Ms. Gibson was among the first Black female FBI agents, but not the first.

]]>

The No. 1 thing to know entering retirement: How much are you really spending?

Austin Costello — Wed, 11 Mar 2026 07:00:00 -0400

When federal employees begin thinking about retirement, most focus first on the big questions.

When should I claim Social Security?

Should I keep Federal Employee Health Benefits or enroll in Medicare?

How much can I expect from my Federal Employee Retirement System annuity?

But there’s one question that should come before all of that.

How much am I actually spending?

Understanding how to manage your finances in retirement must start with this simple question. While it may seem basic, this step is one of the most empowering, yet often overlooked, parts of planning for your future.

Your spending habits, not your Thrift Savings Plan balance and not your annuity estimate, create the foundation of retirement income planning. Because your spending dictates how much income you’ll need, it’s necessary before you retire to determine how much you’ll withdraw from your investments. Once you know how much you’re really spending, it’s much easier to figure out how to invest your money, how much you can safely take out each year and whether your savings will last.

Why spending is so often misjudged

Many people estimate their monthly spending with a round figure, such as “probably around $5,000.” However, a closer look at bank statements, credit card records and bills often reveals that the actual amount is 20–30% higher than their initial guess. National data backs this up — according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Expenditure Survey, households headed by someone age 65 or older spent an average of $60,087 in 2023, not much lower than working-age households.

It’s not that people are trying to hide anything. It's just how we are. A lot of our spending happens automatically or pops up at odd times, so it’s easy to overlook certain costs.

Insurance premiums, property taxes, vehicle repairs, vacations, gifts and subscriptions are easy to overlook. Plus, as we move toward retirement, life itself is changing. You may plan to downsize or travel more, or you may find new costs replacing old ones.

Without a true understanding of your spending, even the most detailed retirement plan can miss the mark.

Assess the situation prior to taking action

The most reliable way to find your true spending level is to track every expense for 6–12 months before retirement.

That’s long enough to capture both everyday spending and seasonal or annual expenses, everything from holiday travel to homeowners’ insurance renewals.

You can use a spreadsheet, budgeting software or simply your bank and credit card statements. Start by dividing expenses into broad categories:

Housing: mortgage or rent, property taxes, maintenance, homeowners association fees, utilities.
Transportation: car payments, fuel, insurance, repairs, rideshares.
Health care: FEHB premiums, copays, prescriptions, dental and vision.
Food: groceries, dining out, meal delivery.
Lifestyle: travel, entertainment, gifts, hobbies, charitable giving.
Other: taxes, personal care, subscriptions, miscellaneous items.

Once you’ve tracked and categorized expenses for several months, calculate your average monthly spending. Then multiply that by 12 for an annual estimate.

This is your real cost of living.

Be realistic about what will change

Many retirees assume their spending will drop dramatically once they leave work. After all, there’s no more commute, fewer dry-cleaning bills and less money spent on lunches or professional clothing.

This could all be true, but as these expenses fall off, other expenses often rise. You’ll have more free time, which can mean more travel, dining out or general spending. Health care costs tend to increase, even for those covered under FEHB or Medicare. And if you’ve been putting off home projects or bucket-list trips, the early retirement years are often when they happen.

A good rule of thumb: plan for the first few years of retirement to cost roughly the same as your final working years. You can always adjust downward once you see how your new lifestyle settles in.

Why your spending drives the whole plan

Once you have a realistic understanding of how much you spend, everything else in your financial plan comes into focus.

Your spending dictates:

How much income you’ll need each month. This includes your FERS annuity, Social Security and TSP withdrawals.
How your portfolio should be structured. The size and timing of withdrawals affect your investment mix, cash reserves and risk tolerance.
How sustainable your plan will be. If you draw more than your portfolio can reasonably sustain, even a well-funded TSP can deplete faster than expected.

If you underestimate your spending, you may overestimate how long your assets will last. For example, if you believe your annual expenses are $60,000 but they’re actually $75,000, that $15,000 gap has to come from somewhere - likely from your TSP or savings. Over 20–30 years of retirement, that difference compounds significantly.

Adjusting as life happens

Retirement isn’t a static event. It’s a new phase of life that evolves over time. Early retirement years tend to be more active (and expensive), while later years may focus more on health care or downsizing.

That’s why it’s smart to review and update your spending plan every year, especially in the first five years of retirement. Keep an eye on new expenses like spoiling grandchildren, finding new hobbies or finally booking that trip you’ve been thinking about. All of this may require you to adjust your withdrawals accordingly.

It’s important to keep an eye on rising prices. Even small increases like groceries or gas, can add up over many years. Your plan should make room for spending to go up a little bit as things get more expensive. Unfortunately, that’s just inflation.

Build a plan just for you, and your confidence

Many people resist tracking spending because it feels restrictive or annoying.

But in retirement, knowing your numbers isn’t about limitation, it’s about freedom.

When you know exactly how much you spend and how much income you have to cover it, you gain confidence and clarity. You can enjoy your retirement without worrying whether every purchase is “too much.”

Every federal employee’s financial picture is unique, but the same principle applies across the board: your spending sets the stage for everything that follows.

Before you finalize your retirement date, take the time to understand your expenses in detail. Track them. Question them. Think about how they’ll change as your lifestyle evolves.

Your spending is your foundation. It’s data, so the more information you have, the better decisions you can make to prepare for the life you want in retirement.

This material was created for educational and informational purposes only and is not intended as ERISA, tax, legal or investment advice. If you are seeking investment advice specific to your needs, such advice services must be obtained on your own separate from this educational material.

Austin Costello, CFP® is an LPL Financial Planner with Capital Financial Planners. If you have questions about your insurance needs or any other federal-specific financial planning question, register for a complimentary checkup. For topics covered in even greater depth, see our YouTube page.

]]>

Travel industry rallies support for TSA staff working without pay amid concern of delays during shutdown

Eric Katz — Fri, 06 Mar 2026 15:56:00 -0500

The travel industry is imploring lawmakers to ensure on-time pay for Transportation Security Administration employees, launching a campaign on Thursday to pressure Congress into passing legislation to that effect while the partial government shutdown remains in effect.

As TSA employees have already received a partial paycheck and are preparing to miss their next one entirely, private sector operators who depend on smoothly running airports are speaking out in favor of the agency’s workforce. The Homeland Security Department shutdown is finishing its third week as congressional Democrats and the White House remain divided on the agency’s funding and how to reform its immigration enforcement crackdown.

Travel industry officials created the “Pay Federal Aviation Workers” campaign to rally support to end the shutdown and, absent that, pass various pieces of legislation that would ensure air traffic controllers and TSA staff receive on-time paychecks during funding lapses. The Federal Aviation Administration, like all agencies outside DHS, is fully funded for fiscal 2026 and air traffic controllers are therefore not impacted by the current impasse.

They also called for Customs and Border Protection officers to receive on-time pay, though most CBP employees are being paid on a normal schedule thanks to funding from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Geoff Freeman, president of the U.S. Travel Association, said the “stakes are too high” to continue making TSA employees sacrifice.

“TSA officers screen nearly a billion passengers a year,” Freeman said. “With an average salary of around $35,000, these are workers who simply cannot afford to miss a paycheck. Right now, Congress is allowing them to do that work without one.”

Missed pay for TSA workers often serves as a flash point in shutdowns, as it typically causes a spike in unscheduled absences that in turn leads to longer security lines. Those delays tend to increase pressure on lawmakers to find a resolution to their standoffs.

Acting TSA Administrator Ha Nguyen McNeill told Congress last month that her agency saw a 25% increase in attrition during the record-setting shutdown last fall compared to the same six-week period the year before the lapse. TSA can ill-afford a similar employee drain now, she added, as the agency is preparing for increased traffic during spring break and the upcoming World Cup.

“It’s affecting recruiting as we speak,” she said of the lingering uncertainty.

Chris Sununu, a former Republican governor from New Hampshire and current president of Airlines for America, said his clients have met demand by adding capacity, but the government is failing to hold up its end of the bargain.

“Congress must get to the table and act with urgency to get a deal done that ensures frontline agencies can fully operate and employees can get the paychecks they earn for the important work they do to keep our skies secure,” Sununu said.

The groups estimated that TSA would screen an average of 2.8 million passengers per day in March and April, an all-time high. The 2025 shutdown caused 9,000 flights to be delayed or canceled, they said, which took a $6 billion toll on the travel industry.

DHS employees have told Government Executive they are still paying off loans they took out during the last shutdown and are rotating taking unpaid days off to save on commuting costs.

“For the third time in five months, TSA screeners are being asked to perform their jobs without pay because Washington can’t find a way to do its job,” said Todd Hauptli, president of the American Association of Airport Executives. “That’s wrong, and dedicated screeners shouldn’t have to pay the price for continued Washington dysfunction.”

The House on Thursday once again advanced a spending bill for DHS, though it was approved largely along party lines and did not contain the new checks on DHS law enforcement personnel that Democrats are seeking. The measure is not expected to pass the Senate in its current form. Democratic leadership and the White House have traded legislative reform proposals back and forth—and President Trump announced on Thursday he would fire DHS Secretary Kristi Noem—but the two sides have yet to reach an agreement that would reopen the department.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., made clear on Thursday that Noem's removal would not lead to a change in Democrats' strategy in holding up DHS funding.

"This is a problem of policy, not personnel," Schumer said. "The rot is deep. No one person can straighten this up until the president changes the whole agency, stops the violence and reins in [Immigration and Customs Enforcement]."

]]>

A year after the Social Security Fairness Act, some retirees are still waiting for full benefits

Tammy Flanagan — Thu, 05 Mar 2026 15:00:00 -0500

On Jan. 5, 2025, President Biden signed the Social Security Fairness Act (SSFA) into law, repealing two onerous Social Security provisions: the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO) – or the “Evil Twins,” as the late columnist Mike Causey dubbed them. The law restored full Social Security benefits to millions of retired public service workers, including federal retirees covered by the Civil Service Retirement System.

Although federal employees who paid into the Civil Service Retirement System were exempt from FICA taxes, many had worked in Social Security-covered employment before, after, or even during their federal employment, as well as serving in the military, where FICA taxes have been paid since 1957. The SSFA also restored spousal and widows’ benefits previously reduced by the GPO.

The SSFA is retroactive to Jan. 2024, meaning Dec. 2023 is the last month the WEP and GPO applied. This was welcome news for millions of public servants who had been receiving reduced retirement benefits and often were prevented from receiving spousal and widows’ benefits. However, some individuals are not entitled to retroactive payments. Those who have not applied for Social Security retirement benefits yet will not see the impact of this law until they begin receiving benefits.

Some individuals eligible for spousal and widows’ benefits before Jan. 2024 have been denied retroactive benefits because of when they previously inquired. They were told benefits would only be applied six months before the date of application. Many see this as inconsistent with the intent of the SSFA.

Survivors’ benefits

As a surviving spouse, you may be able to receive full benefits (up to 100% of the deceased spouse’s benefit amount) at your full retirement age. The full retirement age for survivors born from 1945 through 1956 is 66. It increases gradually for those born from 1957 through 1962. For anyone born in 1962 or later, full survivors’ benefits are payable at age 67. This differs from the full retirement age for retirement benefits, which is 67 for people born in 1960 or later.

A surviving spouse can get reduced benefits as early as age 60. If your surviving spouse has a disability, benefits can begin as early as age 50. For more information on survivors’ benefits, visit www.ssa.gov/survivorplan.

To qualify for Social Security widow’s benefits in addition to benefits payable at age 60, other requirements include:

Must be age 60 or older
Any age if caring for dependent children under 16 or receiving Social Security disability benefits
Former spouses who were married to the worker for at least 10 years and meet one of the above requirements

A spousal benefit payable while the worker is alive can be as much as half of the worker's primary insurance amount, depending on the worker's age at retirement. If a spouse begins receiving benefits before normal retirement age, the benefit is reduced. However, if a spouse is caring for a qualifying child, the spousal benefit is not reduced.

If a spouse is eligible for a retirement benefit based on his or her own earnings and that benefit is higher than the spousal benefit, only the earned retirement benefit will be paid. A spouse can retire as early as age 62, but doing so may result in a benefit of as little as 32.5% of the worker's primary insurance amount.

Spousal benefits

Requirements to qualify for Social Security spousal benefits include:

The worker must file for retirement benefits for the spouse to be eligible for a benefit based on the worker's earnings
Spouse must be at least age 62, or any age if caring for dependent children under 16 or receiving Social Security disability benefits
Former spouses who have not remarried and were married to the worker for at least 10 years may also qualify

Spouses, surviving spouses, and former spouses are subject to an earnings limit that can reduce or terminate benefits until they reach full retirement age, when the limit no longer applies, or when earned income falls below the annual earnings limit ($24,480 in 2026).

To clarify eligibility for the repealed WEP and GPO, Social Security published FAQs at https://www.ssa.gov/benefits/retirement/social-security-fairness-act.html, explaining how to claim spousal and widow benefits and unreduced personal benefits.

NARFE member example

Mike Teefy, president of the Vancouver chapter of the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association (NARFE) and a retired SSA employee, shared a story from a member named Charles. It highlights perceived inequities in benefit payments after the repeal of WEP and GPO.

Charles divided impacted individuals into two groups:

Group 1: Individuals who formally applied for Social Security spousal benefits. Before the Act, some received reduced or no benefits due to WEP and GPO. SSA generally processed these cases to provide benefits back to Jan. 2024.
Group 2: Individuals who did not formally apply for benefits because they assumed their payments would be reduced to zero or insignificantly small amounts. SSA processed these cases to provide benefits six months from the application date. For example, an individual applying today would have benefits start six months before the application rather than back to Jan. 2024.

Many in Group 2 wonder why they were not entitled to benefits back to Jan. 2024, as the Act provided retroactive payments. Charles, 81, a CSRS retiree who retired in July 2011, has 34 Social Security credits and is not eligible for his own retirement benefit. He never applied for spousal benefits because the offset would have reduced them to zero.

His wife, 80, began receiving Social Security retirement payments in her mid-60s. In late January 2025, Charles contacted his local SSA office about spousal benefits under the SSFA. After a phone interview on Feb. 14, 2025, he received a deposit covering July 2024 through Jan. 2025 (six months’ retroactive benefits). He did not receive payments for Jan.–June 2024 because he was told retroactive benefits were limited to six months from his application date.

Charles and others who have not formally filed should contact SSA immediately to protect their benefits.

Retroactive benefits rules

According to the SSA handbook (https://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/handbook/handbook.15/handbook-1513.html), full retirement age and survivor claims may be paid retroactively up to six months. Certain disability claims may be paid up to 12 months retroactively. You are entitled to benefits beginning the first month in the retroactive period that you meet all requirements, except for filing an application.

For example, if you reach full retirement age in March 2022, are fully insured, and file for benefits in March 2026, you may be entitled to retroactive benefits starting Sept. 2025 (six months before filing). Retroactive benefits for months prior to full retirement age are not payable if this permanently reduces the monthly benefit, except for surviving spouses or surviving divorced spouses under disability who are under 61 in the filing month. Surviving spouses filing after a worker's death may be entitled to benefits in the month of death if otherwise eligible.

Congressional review

Senators Susan Collins, Bill Cassidy, John Cornyn, and John Fetterman sent a letter to SSA Administrator Leland Dudek requesting a review of agency policy to grant maximum retroactive payments to protected spouses affected by the SSFA back to Jan. 2024. The SSFA, coauthored by Collins and cosponsored by Cassidy, Fetterman, and Cornyn, restores Social Security benefits for millions of public employees and their spouses by repealing WEP and GPO, including retroactive payments to Jan. 2024.

Like Charles, several constituents contacted senators’ offices regarding retroactive benefits. They were told by SSA employees years ago that spousal benefits would be reduced to $0 under the GPO, so they did not file claims. Now, these spouses are being told to file a claim but are only granted up to six months’ retroactivity from the most recent SSA contact.

Filing for reconsideration

Teefy advises members who did not receive retroactive benefits back to Jan. 2024 to file Form SSA-561, Request for Reconsideration. This action may protect rights until SSA resolves the issue or Congress or courts require SSA to conform to the legislation and Jan. 2024 effective date.

Those who have not filed for spousal benefits can use the following:

Widows and former spouses: https://www.ssa.gov/forms/ssa-10.html
Spouses and divorced spouses: https://www.ssa.gov/forms/ssa-2.html#
Marriage certification: online or Form SSA-3: https://www.ssa.gov/forms/ssa-3.pdf

Claims may require birth certificates, marriage, divorce, and death certificates depending on the type of benefits filed.

]]>

House Dems want to know why retirees aren’t getting physical tax documents from OPM

Carten Cordell — Wed, 04 Mar 2026 07:00:00 -0500

Updated at 8:27 a.m. ET March 4

With tax season in full swing, House Democrats are pressing the Office of Personnel Management for answers about reports that federal retirees and annuitants aren’t receiving paper copies of tax documents needed to file their returns.

In the March 2 letter to OPM Director Scott Kupor, nine House members — led by Reps. James Walkinshaw, D-Va., and Frank Pallone, D-N.J. — inquired why some retirees still haven’t received physical copies of their 1099-R forms.

“Each year, OPM states that it will mail physical Form 1099-R documents to any annuitant who does not have an email address on file after January 31,” the letter said. “Despite this policy, we have heard from numerous constituents who still have not received their Form 1099-R or annuity statements, even after waiting well beyond the maximum two-week delivery window communicated by your staff.”

Form 1099-R covers annual distributions from a variety of retirement plans, including pensions, individual retirement arrangements, survivor income benefit plans, insurance contracts and others.

OPM’s Retirement Services Online portal will provide digital copies to retirees and annuitants with a Login.gov account or an email address. For those without either, the agency typically sends paper forms out by Jan. 31.

But according to some, neither has been happening this year, and when retirees or annuitants try to reach out to OPM, they can’t get an answer.

John Hatton, staff vice president for policy and programs at the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association, told Government Executive that his organization has been "inundated" with calls from retirees who had not received a physical 1099-R form or had difficulty acquiring one online.

"We're hearing from a lot of members who don't know how to get their form, and they can't call OPM because it's almost impossible to get through on the phone," he said. "We've told people to start calling at 7:40 a.m. and keep calling for 30 minutes, and you might get through . . . And even if they did get through, [OPM] don't let you switch to mail delivery via the phone — you need to create an account just to switch it."

OPM’s inspector general recently cited customer service at its Retirement Services office as a top management challenge for fiscal 2026 due contributing factors such as a lack of resources, the loss of 100 retirement personnel from the deferred resignation program and the office’s own retirements and hiring action cancellations.

"OPM has made 1099 forms available digitally with one-click access, and users no longer need a PIN to sign in," said OPM spokesperson McLaurine Pinover in a email. "Anyone without a Retirement Services Online account was mailed a paper copy, and some deliveries may have been delayed by recent winter storms in the DC and Northeast region. We are advising recipients to allow about 10 days for mail delivery."

The nine House members requested that OPM provide statistics on the current status of 1099-Rs to be mailed, information on average call and wait times to the Office of Retirement Services’ help line, any information on customer service satisfaction data and metrics for success and how the agency plans to address the customer service issues.

Erich Wagner contributed to this report. The story was updated to include a comment from OPM.

]]>

Most TSP funds were flat in February

Erich Wagner — Mon, 02 Mar 2026 15:40:06 -0500

Most portfolios in the federal government’s 401(k)-style retirement savings program were relatively flat last month, with just one fund exceeding 2% growth and another ending February in the red.

The Thrift Savings Plan’s international (I) was the lone bright spot, gaining 6.05% last month. So far this year, the I Fund has grown 12.34%. Meanwhile, the small-and mid-size businesses of the S Fund increased 1.08% in January, bringing its returns since January to 3.52%.

The fixed income (F) fund gained 1.63% in February; so far this year, it has increased 1.84%. And the G Fund, which is made up of government securities, grew by its statutorily mandated rate of 0.33%. So far in 2026, the G Fund has increased 0.70%.

The common stocks of the C Fund were the only TSP offerings to lose value last month, falling 0.76%. So far this year, the C Fund is up 0.68%.

Each of the TSP’s lifecycle (L) funds, which shift toward more conservative investments as participants get closer to retirement, posted modest gains in February. The L Income Fund, designed for those who have already begun making withdrawals, increased 0.82%; L 2030, 1.26%; L 2035, 1.41%; L 2040, 1.50%; L 2045, 1.58%; L 2050, 1.65%; L 2055, 1.82%; L 2060, 1.82%; L 2065, 1.82%; L 2070, 1.82%: and L 2075, 1.82%.

So far this year, the L Income Fund has grown 1.95%; L 2030, 3.23%; L 2035, 3.62%; L 2040, 3.88%; L 2045, 4.10%; L 2050, 4.31%; L 2055, 4.99%; L 2060, 4.99%; L 2065, 4.99%; L 2070, 4.99%; and L 2075, 4.99%.

]]>