A recent bill to come out of a House subcommittee seems to support Biden’s recommendation of 5.2% for next year’s raise, but also looks to slash telework options and limit TSP choices.
Coming out of the Financial Services and General Government subcommittee, which is a part of the House of Representative’s Appropriations Committee, is one of the twelve budgetary bills needed to keep the government running past September 30th. The budgetary measure does not mention a federal pay raise, indicating support of the suggested salary increase of 5.2% in Biden’s budget, which was published in March. This would be the largest annual raise for the federal workforce since 1980 when it was 9.1%.
How would a 5.2% annual raise impact your financial plan? Don’t miss our next webinar on Financial Planning for Feds!
However, despite the relatively good news about the pay raise, the bill made some drastic cuts to funding for financial and administration agencies, slashing 58% from the budget received for the 2023 fiscal year. If this bill passes as is, OPM would receive $85.5 million, which is $49.2 million less than what the White House recommended, $134.7 million. The bill also targets telework, options in the TSP’s mutual fund window, and FEHB coverage for abortions and gender-affirming care for transgender individuals.
Similar to what was proposed in the “SHOW UP Act,” the bill includes policy riders that would restrict telework, forcing procedures to revert back to pre-pandemic guidelines. The president of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) called these riders “destructive.” And lastly, the proposed legislation to come from the congressional subcommittee also aims to remove ESG (environmental social governance) options from mutual fund choices within the TSP’s mutual fund window.
--
Until Next Time,
You Might Also Enjoy this Podcast:
**Written by Benjamin Derge, Financial Planner, ChFEBC℠ The information has been obtained from sources considered reliable but we do not guarantee that the foregoing material is accurate or complete. Any opinions are those of Benjamin Derge and not necessarily those of RJFS or Raymond James. Links are being provided for information purposes only. Expressions of opinion are as of this date and are subject to change without notice. Raymond James is not affiliated with and does not endorse, authorize, or sponsor any of the listed websites or their respective sponsors.
