Feds: are you counting on FERS for retirement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Definitely counting on it. Not counting on Social Security.

Same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Definitely counting on it. Not counting on Social Security.

Same.

+2. The way we see it... any changes to the FERS rules will almost certainly require grandfathering in those in position before the changes are made. Which is how such changes have bene implemented to-date. So they would most likely only affect new hires.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Definitely counting on it. Not counting on Social Security.

I am counting on both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

I would also like to know where the FERS $s are invested. G-bonds?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

I would also like to know where the FERS $s are invested. G-bonds?

https://www.opm.gov/about-us/reports-publications/fy-2022-civil-service-retirement-and-disability-fund-annual-report.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Definitely counting on it. Not counting on Social Security.

Same.

... if fortunate to live that long and he healthy.

I think that Social Security will be means-tested.

I personally believe that the changes that need to be made to the federal budget should be made ASAP, versus getting to more of a crisis and have to make steeper changes.

We should do best for children and the next generations.

I think SS will likely be means-tested. And, across the country (not this board, not DMV) retirement savings and defined-benefit pensions are very low overall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the biggest threat to FERS is that they cut the inflation adjustment which will substantially reduce the value of the pension. That has been one of the proposals put forward and while I think the % payout would not be changed for existing employees the inflation adjustment could be changed, even for current employees.

Today I learned that FERS has an inflation adjustment.

It is not a full adjustment. It is below actual inflation so over time the pension will be worth less and less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Definitely counting on it. Not counting on Social Security.

Same.

... if fortunate to live that long and he healthy.

I think that Social Security will be means-tested. I think SS will likely be means-tested.

I personally believe that the changes that need to be made to the federal budget should be made ASAP, versus getting to more of a crisis and have to make steeper changes.

We should do best for children and the next generations.

I think SS will likely be means-tested. And, across the country (not this board, not DMV) retirement savings and defined-benefit pensions are very low overall.

This is common fear mongering and not going to happen. It’s more (although still highly improbable) likely that the entire system collapses altogether.

A large segment of the US population having a promised retirement entitlement that they had paid into for decades stripped simply because they had been responsible enough to set aside additional savings would likely lead to a second revolution/civil war especially in the current political climate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Definitely counting on it. Not counting on Social Security.

Same.

... if fortunate to live that long and he healthy.

I think that Social Security will be means-tested. I think SS will likely be means-tested.

I personally believe that the changes that need to be made to the federal budget should be made ASAP, versus getting to more of a crisis and have to make steeper changes.

We should do best for children and the next generations.

I think SS will likely be means-tested. And, across the country (not this board, not DMV) retirement savings and defined-benefit pensions are very low overall.

This is common fear mongering and not going to happen. It’s more (although still highly improbable) likely that the entire system collapses altogether.

A large segment of the US population having a promised retirement entitlement that they had paid into for decades stripped simply because they had been responsible enough to set aside additional savings would likely lead to a second revolution/civil war especially in the current political climate.

Probably not even a large enough segment of the population to make a dent in the funding shortfall. Much more likely the contribution cap increases with a small increase in benefits paid out.

[Anonymous]

I am counting on it but I wouldn't call it a "nice" pension. It's a pension, but reduced in comparison to the civil service system. Nowhere near as "nice" as what my parent received in their non-federal industry after retiring in 1990 -- nearly 70% of ending salary with an annual COLA.

I basically will be receiving about 1/3 of my salary when I retire. Totally grateful for that, but compared to pensions of the past or the civil service, it's not super duper, overly generous. I guess our standards have changed if people think this is

[Anonymous]

If Trump takes dc he takes these monies

Yes he will

[Anonymous]

I’m counting on it but it’s not that great, at least compared to the old pension by paying 0.8%. My coworkers that started before 2012 or so get a bigger paycheck than me just bc of that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am counting on it but I wouldn't call it a "nice" pension. It's a pension, but reduced in comparison to the civil service system. Nowhere near as "nice" as what my parent received in their non-federal industry after retiring in 1990 -- nearly 70% of ending salary with an annual COLA.

I basically will be receiving about 1/3 of my salary when I retire. Totally grateful for that, but compared to pensions of the past or the civil service, it's not super duper, overly generous. I guess our standards have changed if people think this is

Yes, the standard FERs pension is only ~ half of the pension people got under CSRS but when you factor in social security (which CSRS are ineligible for) and a new 5% match in TSP contributions (not to mention the creation of far more lucrative TSP investment fund options) the difference becomes much less

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am counting on it but I wouldn't call it a "nice" pension. It's a pension, but reduced in comparison to the civil service system. Nowhere near as "nice" as what my parent received in their non-federal industry after retiring in 1990 -- nearly 70% of ending salary with an annual COLA.

I basically will be receiving about 1/3 of my salary when I retire. Totally grateful for that, but compared to pensions of the past or the civil service, it's not super duper, overly generous. I guess our standards have changed if people think this is

Yes, the standard FERs pension is only ~ half of the pension people got under CSRS but when you factor in social security (which CSRS are ineligible for) and a new 5% match in TSP contributions (not to mention the creation of far more lucrative TSP investment fund options) the difference becomes much less

Edited to add that this is assuming standard FERS. PP is correct that those hired post 2013 are far more disadvantaged.

[Anonymous]

I am counting on FERS but not SS. That said, I'm trying to contribute enough to TSP and IRA that I'd have the choice to leave the government if I have to, and have a more bare bones retirement. I'm under 40 and there are certain actions the agency or administration could take that would have me looking for an exit.