Feds: are you counting on FERS for retirement?

[Anonymous]

I'm counting on it too, which is why I no longer vote for the GOP.

[Anonymous]

This question brought to you by the a research assistant at Project 2025....

[Anonymous]

I am banking it every month and have for over 10 years. I took it before 62 just in case and why not. It far exceeds what I put in. I am past the reduced pension breakeven point. It's a great racket.

[Anonymous]

Absolutely counting on it.

[Anonymous]

If they try to kill pensions they’ll likely do it with any new hires. They can’t reneg on a contractual agreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a lawyer here but I am a lifelong fed who is positioned to get a nice FERS pension. I’ve also built a good TSP and our house will be paid off. But of course FERS will be an important consideration as to when I can safely retire. Given all the craziness in politics and the growing federal debt, is there any real concern that Congress would reduce FERS payouts in the future? I know that we pay into the system so I assume there would be legal challenges but I have no clue how successful those challenges might be.

Federal employees have property rights in their vested retirement benefits. The government can't take them away without compensation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a lawyer here but I am a lifelong fed who is positioned to get a nice FERS pension. I’ve also built a good TSP and our house will be paid off. But of course FERS will be an important consideration as to when I can safely retire. Given all the craziness in politics and the growing federal debt, is there any real concern that Congress would reduce FERS payouts in the future? I know that we pay into the system so I assume there would be legal challenges but I have no clue how successful those challenges might be.

Federal employees have property rights in their vested retirement benefits. The government can't take them away without compensation.

I think they can change from high 3 to high 5. They can also reduce or eliminate the inflation adjustments.

[Anonymous]

An organization 35 trillion in debt is going to have to either cut or pay with less valuable dollars and no inflation adjustment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An organization 35 trillion in debt is going to have to either cut or pay with less valuable dollars and no inflation adjustment.

.

I thought the TSP was well funded? Or are we trying to destroy it like SS by raiding its accounts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An organization 35 trillion in debt is going to have to either cut or pay with less valuable dollars and no inflation adjustment.

.

I thought the TSP was well funded? Or are we trying to destroy it like SS by raiding its accounts?

Sorry I meant FERS is well funded

[Anonymous]

I am afraid there might not be a pension if we continue to take debt like this

[Anonymous]

FERS is fully funded for itself and always has been. (OPM increases the agency contribution piece if it's actuarially necessary.) The increased contribution that RAE and FRAE employees make is to make up for CSRS employees, whose pension has never been fully funded. But there are few CSRS employees left in active service, and the number of pensioners is going down. That's not to say something *couldn't* change, but FERS is not contributing one cent to the federal debt (except, I suppose, obliquely in that the agencies have to make contributions each year which raise their annual budgets).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FERS is fully funded for itself and always has been. (OPM increases the agency contribution piece if it's actuarially necessary.) The increased contribution that RAE and FRAE employees make is to make up for CSRS employees, whose pension has never been fully funded. But there are few CSRS employees left in active service, and the number of pensioners is going down. That's not to say something *couldn't* change, but FERS is not contributing one cent to the federal debt (except, I suppose, obliquely in that the agencies have to make contributions each year which raise their annual budgets).

Thanks PP. I was the one who mentioned above that I thought FERS was funded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FERS is fully funded for itself and always has been. (OPM increases the agency contribution piece if it's actuarially necessary.) The increased contribution that RAE and FRAE employees make is to make up for CSRS employees, whose pension has never been fully funded. But there are few CSRS employees left in active service, and the number of pensioners is going down. That's not to say something *couldn't* change, but FERS is not contributing one cent to the federal debt (except, I suppose, obliquely in that the agencies have to make contributions each year which raise their annual budgets).

Where is all FERS funds are? Are they also part of treasury bonds? If yes, then what would happen if the rates goes higher or any other problem from high national debt?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Definitely counting on it. Two-fed family. I suppose we would not be destitute without it, but it would be a huge problem.

If things get so bad that FERS and SS cannot pay out, I would think we have bigger problems such as the collapse of our nation.

This.