Bill Overview
Title: LEO Fair Retirement Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill makes a series of changes to certain retirement and premium pay calculations for federal law enforcement officers (LEOs). Specifically, the bill provides that for purposes of computing the annuity of an LEO under the Civil Service Retirement System and the Federal Employees Retirement System, any premium pay earned by such LEO in excess of limitations imposed on such pay shall be included in the LEO's average pay, contingent on the payment of a specified lump sum by the LEO to the Office of Personnel Management. The bill allows for a nonrefundable tax credit with respect to such lump-sum payments. The bill also makes postal inspectors, federal air marshals, and other specified personnel eligible for availability pay (i.e., premium pay paid to LEOs who are criminal investigators).
Sponsors: Rep. Pascrell, Bill, Jr. [D-NJ-9]
Target Audience
Population: Federal law enforcement officers in the U.S. including postal inspectors, federal air marshals, and criminal investigators
Estimated Size: 110000
- The bill affects federal law enforcement officers in the U.S. by changing retirement and pay calculations.
- Changes are specific to computations under the Civil Service Retirement System and the Federal Employees Retirement System.
- It includes provisions for premium pay earnings and allows a new nonrefundable tax credit.
- The bill also extends eligibility for availability pay to postal inspectors, federal air marshals, and similar personnel.
Reasoning
- The policy targets specific segments of federal law enforcement officers, such as postal inspectors and air marshals, who may benefit from changes in premium pay and retirement calculations.
- This policy is not expected to impact individuals outside of federal employment or those in law enforcement roles not covered by the bill, thus those in the general population or local law enforcement will likely see 'none' as the impact.
- Federal officers in the middle or later stages of their career, especially those close to retirement, will potentially see more benefit than those just beginning their careers.
- Younger officers might perceive the upfront cost of a lump sum for premium pay consideration as a more significant burden compared to senior officers.
- A nonrefundable tax credit could make the idea of paying a lump sum more attractive to those who can afford it, effectively subsidizing their future retirement benefit calculations.
Simulated Interviews
Postal Inspector (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this policy as a positive step as it will increase my retirement benefits.
- Paying the lump sum seems like a worthwhile investment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Federal Air Marshal (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy helps but the lump sum is a financial strain right now.
- I'm glad they include us for availability pay.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Federal Investigator (Miami, FL)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm conflicted; getting more in retirement sounds good, but paying upfront is difficult.
- I have to pay off my student loans first.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Criminal Investigator (Houston, TX)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This adjustment is a benefit for my future without affecting my current lifestyle negatively.
- Happy with the inclusion of new classifications for pay.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 8 |
Newly hired Federal Investigator (Seattle, WA)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's good that they think about our future benefits.
- I'm not sure about paying a lump sum when still establishing myself financially.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Senior Postal Inspector (Chicago, IL)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm thrilled about this policy as it almost feels like an immediate benefit upon retirement.
- The tax credit makes the lump sum payment more bearable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 9 |
Federal Air Marshal (New York, NY)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm positive about this change but more policy changes also focusing on career advancement would help.
- Allows me to think more strategically about my retirement.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Federal Criminal Investigator (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This makes retirement planning a little easier given my health concerns.
- The lump sum is a bit daunting, but I understand its purpose.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Federal Field Agent (Boston, MA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is beneficial but the immediate cost is prohibitive considering my financial situation.
- Happy about the tax credit though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Federal Air Marshal (Dallas, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Additional premium pay eligibility is great, especially as I look at the potential for more lucrative roles.
- Still thinking of it merely as a long-term plan.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Year 2: $80000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $110000000)
Year 3: $85000000 (Low: $65000000, High: $115000000)
Year 5: $90000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $120000000)
Year 10: $100000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $130000000)
Year 100: $120000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $150000000)
Key Considerations
- Future demographics of the federal LEO workforce could influence long-term fiscal effects.
- Participation rate in the lump-sum payment option and associated tax credits will heavily impact fiscal estimates.
- Potential benefits to federal LEOs could influence recruitment and retention within these roles.