0:00
if you're a federal employee you'll want
0:02
to be aware of and pay attention to some
0:04
proposals that are floating around in
0:06
Congress right now because if they were
0:09
to actually become law they could
0:11
significantly impact your benefits in a
0:14
negative way Let's take a look Hi
0:16
everyone I'm Ian Smith with fedsmith.com
0:19
and I wanted to bring to your attention
0:22
uh some proposals that have been floated
0:24
recently in Congress as the budget
0:26
process and budget legislation is being
0:28
debated The latest ones were just
0:30
announced in the House by Congressman
0:33
James Comr a Republican from Kentucky
0:36
and he is chairman of the House
0:38
Committee on Oversight and Government
0:39
Reform Comr announced markup of budget
0:43
legislation that's going to be taking
0:44
place this week on Wednesday April 30th
0:47
at 10:00 a.m Eastern I'm recording this
0:50
video on the Monday before so that's why
0:52
I say this week Now just a disclaimer up
0:54
front these are just proposals that are
0:57
being considered in the House They are
0:59
not law They're not for sure happening
1:01
and they're subject to change So please
1:03
be aware of that What are these
1:06
proposals the first one would raise the
1:10
federal employees retirement system or
1:12
furs contribution requirements And uh
1:15
this would raise the contribution rate
1:17
for many existing civilian federal
1:20
employees and postal employees up to the
1:24
4.4% And the estimated savings of this
1:29
$30.716 billion in revenue uh that would
1:33
be increased to go towards deficit
1:35
reduction And on that point I I meant to
1:37
mention earlier the reason all this is
1:39
being debated is because the um the
1:42
Republicans in Congress are looking to
1:44
pass a budget that that makes spending
1:46
cuts to help offset the growing federal
1:50
debt which currently stands at just over
1:53
36 trillion last I checked The second
1:55
proposal would eliminate the FUR's
1:57
annuity supplement This would according
2:00
to Comr this would apply to new federal
2:02
retirees It would eliminate the
2:04
additional additional retirement annuity
2:06
payment that those eligible to retire
2:09
before the age of 62 currently receive
2:12
until they reach the age of Social
2:14
Security retirement eligibility benefits
2:17
However federal employees in jobs
2:19
subject to mandatory early retirement
2:21
would be exempt from this The estimated
2:24
savings of this proposal are 10.113
2:27
billion The next item is switching to a
2:30
high- five average salary for pension
2:34
calculations So currently the pension
2:38
for under furs or CSRS is calculated um
2:41
based on a high three This would change
2:43
to a high five meaning your highest five
2:45
years of uh earnings which typically are
2:49
your your last years of federal service
2:52
And this would likely reduce the
2:53
retirement payments for most federal
2:55
employees um by changing it from the
2:59
highest three years of average earnings
3:02
to high five The estimated savings on
3:04
that is 4.75 billion on this proposal
3:08
Next up is an option for new hires to
3:12
elect at will employment and lower furs
3:15
contributions So what this proposal
3:17
would do is it would give newly hired
3:19
federal employees the option to elect to
3:21
serve as at will employees without the
3:23
typical merit system protections that
3:26
most federal employees have in exchange
3:28
for higher take-home pay with a lower
3:31
FUR's contribution rate
3:34
Federal employees who opt to retain
3:36
their civil service protections would
3:38
face higher retirement contributions in
3:40
other words and thereby creating a
3:43
financial penalty for for that job
3:46
security The estimated savings of this
3:48
proposal is 4.541 billion The next item
3:53
is setting up a filing fee for MSPB
3:57
claims and appeals And what this
3:59
proposal says is it would it's designed
4:01
to reduce frivolous employee appeals to
4:04
the MSPB that's the Merit Systems
4:06
Protection Board regarding agency
4:08
disciplinary actions And it would charge
4:11
a modest fee for MSPB filings that would
4:15
be refunded to employees who win their
4:18
appeals And the estimated savings on
4:20
this proposal is an additional $2
4:23
million in revenue increase to go toward
4:26
deficit reduction And the final item is
4:29
FEB protection So what this would do is
4:34
um it would require a comprehensive
4:36
audit of employee dependents who are
4:39
currently enrolled in FEB That's the
4:41
head excuse me the federal employees
4:43
health benefits program And uh this
4:46
audit would require verifying say
4:48
marriage and birth certificates Any
4:50
individuals who are found to be
4:51
ineligible would be disenrolled because
4:55
there currently are some individuals
4:59
um on FEB plans through their family
5:01
members who shouldn't be there And so
5:03
this would just be an audit looking for
5:04
those The estimated savings of that
5:07
would be 1.5 billion And Congressman
5:09
Comr said in a statement about this
5:12
quote "The House Oversight Committee is
5:14
taking a critical step to advance
5:16
President Trump's America First agenda
5:19
and ensure taxpayer dollars are used
5:21
effectively efficiently and responsibly
5:24
The committee will consider legislation
5:26
that delivers a substantial win for
5:28
fiscal responsibility achieving a
5:31
reduction in the federal deficit of over
5:33
$50 billion Congressional Republicans
5:36
alongside President Trump are taking
5:38
bold action to safeguard taxpayer
5:40
dollars and secure America's financial
5:43
future delivering on our promise to
5:45
hardworking American taxpayers So anyway
5:47
that statement encapsulates the
5:49
reasoning behind these proposals So just
5:52
to sum up I want to reiterate that these
5:55
are just proposals Remember that they
5:57
have not become law They may never
5:58
become law We don't know But they are
6:00
being considered I wanted to make you
6:02
aware of it so you can monitor it and
6:04
pay attention to it since again it could
6:06
have a significant impact on you if any
6:09
of these proposals were to become law Um
6:12
they're likely to change along the way
6:14
and we also aren't going to have a
6:16
tremendous amount of information if or
6:18
until they become law We've been getting
6:20
questions from our readers about um how
6:23
would this affect me directly i mean
6:25
here's my situation specifically Will
6:28
this apply to me unfortunately the
6:30
answer is I don't know Again until it
6:32
becomes enacted and um it's determined
6:36
how it will apply and to whom it will
6:38
apply to we don't have that information
6:40
Some of these proposals also have been
6:42
proposed numerous times in the past and
6:44
they've never come to fruition The
6:46
change to the high- five for instance
6:48
goes back decades that I'm aware of um
6:51
just on FedSmith alone I've come across
6:54
articles written over 10 years ago that
6:56
were talking about this change because
6:58
it was being floated in Congress at that
7:00
time That's a recap of the situation I
7:02
wanted to make you aware of it Like I
7:04
said these proposals are out there and
7:06
it's it's worth monitoring to see where
7:09
they go We will continue to provide
7:11
updates and more information as they're
7:13
available on fedsmith.com and here on
7:15
our YouTube channel So be sure to to
7:18
follow us like subscribe for more
7:20
updates Thank you for watching and