How many Feds here hanging on for MRA?

[sparkytheop]

I wish State would offer a VERA, but we're constantly short of IT staff.

I hear you, @sparkytheop  about walking away, and I'm so close to the finish line that I'll keep on keeping on.  As I've said elsewhere, I value the FEHB for life more than the pension itself.  How long to go if you stay on?

I've got over a decade to MRA, but have 23 years of service.  We get VERA surveys pretty much annually at this point, so I can only hope that the trend continues for a few years and that they'd be willing to let someone in my position go (they would need to fill behind the position, eliminating another one, which means if anyone in one of those other positions wants it, they'd get it before I would.)

[tj]

I think there is a less than 5% chance that I would ride it out until MRA. That's another 19 years. Only way that would happen is if I want to retire in a VHCOL area. :D

[frugalecon]

I think there is a less than 5% chance that I would ride it out until MRA. That's another 19 years. Only way that would happen is if I want to retire in a VHCOL area. :D

If you live in Orange County, that qualifies as a VHCOL area! Are you planning on doing some geoarbitrage, @tj ?

[tj]

I think there is a less than 5% chance that I would ride it out until MRA. That's another 19 years. Only way that would happen is if I want to retire in a VHCOL area. :D

If you live in Orange County, that qualifies as a VHCOL area! Are you planning on doing some geoarbitrage, @tj ?

I do plan on moving after I hit my numbers. I'm probably a few years out depending on market. I can't afford to buy any real estate and I'd like to own something cheap in retirement. I could make it work in the California desert where my parents have one of their places, but might just head back to Arizona.

I think the higher locality pay is sufficient to live here while I need to continue to accumulate. My overall expenses aren't significantly higher than when i lived in Arizona, but i am definitely more homebody-ish here and I'm spending more on rent and less on fun.

It's really cool to live in a walkable area by the beach, but at the same time, it's too cold for me most of the year! It's late march and it was under 60 degrees today!

If I wanted to buy real estate in coastal SoCal....I don't think my income would even qualify for a mortgage.

[Monkey Uncle]

I've now been retired for 6+ years.  I'm still over a year away from MRA and my deferred pension.  Sure, I could have splurged a lot more if I had kept working, but I haven't regretted pulling the plug for a minute.

Wow, that's amazing, @Monkey Uncle , glad to hear you have no regrets and made the best decision for you & yours.  What prompted your early exit, if you don't mind sharing?

Sorry for the slow response.  I've been traveling for the last month and haven't been checking the forum.

Basically, I was fried and ready to get out.  The "do more with less" insanity just kept getting worse year after year.  I worked in public lands management, which involves trying to settle intractable disputes between multiple internal and external stakeholders, so it was just one big conflict day in and day out.  And at the end of the first year of the Trump administration, it was crystal clear that the agency was going to be pursuing policies that made me want to vomit.  I ran the numbers and it seemed pretty doable, so I saw no point in subjecting myself to another 7+ years of that crap.

[elysianfields]

I've now been retired for 6+ years.  I'm still over a year away from MRA and my deferred pension.  Sure, I could have splurged a lot more if I had kept working, but I haven't regretted pulling the plug for a minute.

Wow, that's amazing, @Monkey Uncle , glad to hear you have no regrets and made the best decision for you & yours.  What prompted your early exit, if you don't mind sharing?

Sorry for the slow response.  I've been traveling for the last month and haven't been checking the forum.

Basically, I was fried and ready to get out.  The "do more with less" insanity just kept getting worse year after year.  I worked in public lands management, which involves trying to settle intractable disputes between multiple internal and external stakeholders, so it was just one big conflict day in and day out.  And at the end of the first year of the Trump administration, it was crystal clear that the agency was going to be pursuing policies that made me want to vomit.  I ran the numbers and it seemed pretty doable, so I saw no point in subjecting myself to another 7+ years of that crap.

I certainly feel you there, my last assignment burned me out, and if TFG becomes TNG, that will make for a very… erm… interesting last dash for the finish line.  Fortunately, I haven’t had to fight such intractable battles as you.  Glad that the numbers are working for you.

[Monkey Uncle]

I've been counting down for years. lol.  I have just over 4 years left.  August 4, 2028 is my last day.  :) I've been resolute in that for years.  But to be honest, the closer it gets the more worried I get that it's not enough time.  Specifically my adult kids aren't launched yet and it's starting to feel like they never will be.  They have mental health issues.  OCD, Asperger's, ADHD, Anxiety, Depression, etc.  At 21 and 24, they take two college classes at a time and have never worked a day in their lives.  They also do nothing around the house or care for themselves in any way.  They're both in therapy, meds, etc., but I'm feeling like 4 years will come and go and they'll still be totally dependent on me.

All I want is to lie on a beach in Costa Rica.  I've never even been, but it's my number one fantasy.

Anyway, I never had a number in mind.  I always just figured I'd rather live in a studio apartment than work a day longer than I had to.  But the older my kids get, the more crowded that studio apartment is looking.

ETA:  To be clear, I adore my kids.  They are really sweet smart funny great people.  I'm just super worried about them.

As the parent of an adult child with mental health issues, I can relate to your predicament.  The unfortunate truth is that treatments for mental illnesses don't work very well for the majority of patients, and loved ones should expect a life-long struggle.  I hadn't fully reached that realization when I retired back at the beginning of 2018.  I don't know whether it would have changed my decision.  Regardless, things have worked out so far.  Not that it's been easy by any stretch of the imagination.  But our kid is currently stable and is largely supporting himself.  Feel free to PM me if you'd like to compare notes.

[DeniseNJ]

I've been counting down for years. lol.  I have just over 4 years left.  August 4, 2028 is my last day.  :) I've been resolute in that for years.  But to be honest, the closer it gets the more worried I get that it's not enough time.  Specifically my adult kids aren't launched yet and it's starting to feel like they never will be.  They have mental health issues.  OCD, Asperger's, ADHD, Anxiety, Depression, etc.  At 21 and 24, they take two college classes at a time and have never worked a day in their lives.  They also do nothing around the house or care for themselves in any way.  They're both in therapy, meds, etc., but I'm feeling like 4 years will come and go and they'll still be totally dependent on me.

All I want is to lie on a beach in Costa Rica.  I've never even been, but it's my number one fantasy.

Anyway, I never had a number in mind.  I always just figured I'd rather live in a studio apartment than work a day longer than I had to.  But the older my kids get, the more crowded that studio apartment is looking.

ETA:  To be clear, I adore my kids.  They are really sweet smart funny great people.  I'm just super worried about them.

As the parent of an adult child with mental health issues, I can relate to your predicament.  The unfortunate truth is that treatments for mental illnesses don't work very well for the majority of patients, and loved ones should expect a life-long struggle.  I hadn't fully reached that realization when I retired back at the beginning of 2018.  I don't know whether it would have changed my decision.  Regardless, things have worked out so far.  Not that it's been easy by any stretch of the imagination.  But our kid is currently stable and is largely supporting himself.  Feel free to PM me if you'd like to compare notes.

Thanks!  I appreciate your response.  It's such a shame bc my kids are both really smart but depression, anxiety, and OCD grip hard and it's nearly impossible to get anything done without being completely overwhelmed by even a short list of simple tasks.  But I tend to think they would get more done if I wasn't around to do everything for them.  We'll see what happens when I run off to Costa Rica. :)

[fuzzy math]

I randomly read this thread even though I'm not a fed. My DS is considering becoming a fed and more specifically doing foreign service if it lines up with his eventual degree. I was surprised to see there are so many foreign service people here! Would you recommend it in the present time?

[ROF Expat]

I randomly read this thread even though I'm not a fed. My DS is considering becoming a fed and more specifically doing foreign service if it lines up with his eventual degree. I was surprised to see there are so many foreign service people here! Would you recommend it in the present time?

I retired from the FS and loved my career, but different people have very different experiences. 

I think one of the problems is that very few people really understand what they're getting into unless they've grown up in a Foreign Service family or have worked in an Embassy.  Even talking at length to people you know in the Foreign Service only gives you a limited view.  Trust me, it is not like anything you see in movies. 

IMHO, the only reason to join the FS is because you want the lifestyle.  The lifestyle means moving every two or three years and seeing the world (and the world doesn't just mean London, Paris, and Brussels).  If you can't get genuinely excited about living in places like Astana, Bangkok, Nairobi, or Mexico City, it is not the life for you.  Choosing the Foreign Service lifestyle means two-thirds of your career overseas, so you are making a choice that you aren't normally going to be in the US for things like holidays and to support elderly relatives, and that your kids are not going to have a "normal" US childhood and connections with their extended relatives.  Foreign Service life usually means the spouse having to make some serious compromises on their own career.  The work of the Foreign Service is usually not conducive to specializing in a topic or region.  If you dream of being a specialist and spending a career in and about a single country like China, you will almost certainly be disappointed and unhappy.  If you join because you have a great interest in foreign policy, you will likely be even more disappointed.  Very few FSOs make foreign policy and for those few it usually comes late in the career.  If you join because you have visions of being an Ambassador, good luck.  Your chances (at least at the beginning) are as good as anyone's, but the opportunities are limited and the career cost will be high, with no guarantee  of ultimate success. 

Basically, you (and your family) have to want the lifestyle so much that it will counterbalance everything else.  Trust me; If you really want the lifestyle, there's almost nothing else you can do to replicate it.  If you don't love the lifestyle, nothing about the work will make it ok. 

BTW, if you and your husband are interested in the State Department Foreign Service, you might not have to wait for it to "line up with his eventual degree."  Having a specific degree has almost no relevance to getting into, or succeeding in, the Foreign Service as a generalist.  Technically, Foreign Service Officers don't even require a college degree.  State Foreign Service Specialists and USAID and Foreign Agricultural Service have different processes and requirements from State FSOs. 

For State, if you and your husband are interested, I would suggest starting the highly competitive and time consuming examination process now.  It commonly takes years from first taking the exam to onboarding for successful candidates, and you have nothing to lose by starting early. 

I did a full career and loved it.  I joined to see the world, meet interesting people, and have adventures, and I definitely got to do that.  Professionally, I was recognized and rewarded.  The job extracted some very high costs as well, but I have made my peace with them.  I have never wished I had done anything else.  YMMV. 

I encourage you to get as many firsthand opinions on FS life and career as possible.  I hope others on this thread will contribute, because their different experiences and views will give you a better perspective. 

I wish you only success in whatever you choose to do!

[lhamo]

I randomly read this thread even though I'm not a fed. My DS is considering becoming a fed and more specifically doing foreign service if it lines up with his eventual degree. I was surprised to see there are so many foreign service people here! Would you recommend it in the present time?

I retired from the FS and loved my career, but different people have very different experiences. 

I think one of the problems is that very few people really understand what they're getting into unless they've grown up in a Foreign Service family or have worked in an Embassy.  Even talking at length to people you know in the Foreign Service only gives you a limited view.  Trust me, it is not like anything you see in movies. 

IMHO, the only reason to join the FS is because you want the lifestyle.  The lifestyle means moving every two or three years and seeing the world (and the world doesn't just mean London, Paris, and Brussels).  If you can't get genuinely excited about living in places like Astana, Bangkok, Nairobi, or Mexico City, it is not the life for you.  Choosing the Foreign Service lifestyle means two-thirds of your career overseas, so you are making a choice that you aren't normally going to be in the US for things like holidays and to support elderly relatives, and that your kids are not going to have a "normal" US childhood and connections with their extended relatives.  Foreign Service life usually means the spouse having to make some serious compromises on their own career.  The work of the Foreign Service is usually not conducive to specializing in a topic or region.  If you dream of being a specialist and spending a career in and about a single country like China, you will almost certainly be disappointed and unhappy. If you join because you have a great interest in foreign policy, you will likely be even more disappointed.  Very few FSOs make foreign policy and for those few it usually comes late in the career.  If you join because you have visions of being an Ambassador, good luck.  Your chances (at least at the beginning) are as good as anyone's, but the opportunities are limited and the career cost will be high, with no guarantee  of ultimate success. 

Basically, you (and your family) have to want the lifestyle so much that it will counterbalance everything else.  Trust me; If you really want the lifestyle, there's almost nothing else you can do to replicate it.  If you don't love the lifestyle, nothing about the work will make it ok. 

BTW, if you and your husband are interested in the State Department Foreign Service, you might not have to wait for it to "line up with his eventual degree."  Having a specific degree has almost no relevance to getting into, or succeeding in, the Foreign Service as a generalist.  Technically, Foreign Service Officers don't even require a college degree.  State Foreign Service Specialists and USAID and Foreign Agricultural Service have different processes and requirements from State FSOs. 

For State, if you and your husband are interested, I would suggest starting the highly competitive and time consuming examination process now.  It commonly takes years from first taking the exam to onboarding for successful candidates, and you have nothing to lose by starting early. 

I did a full career and loved it.  I joined to see the world, meet interesting people, and have adventures, and I definitely got to do that.  Professionally, I was recognized and rewarded.  The job extracted some very high costs as well, but I have made my peace with them.  I have never wished I had done anything else.  YMMV. 

I encourage you to get as many firsthand opinions on FS life and career as possible.  I hope others on this thread will contribute, because their different experiences and views will give you a better perspective. 

I wish you only success in whatever you choose to do!

Not former foreign service, but I was foreign service adjacent for most of my professional career in China (I worked in non-profits and for the last few years worked closely with US Embassy staff in Beijing managing the US-China Fulbright program).

Due to the larger number of foreign service postings that require Mandarin proficiency there are quite a few people who manage to have a bit portion of their career focused on greater China, with a broader focus on Asia.  A typical career path (based on observations of some of my Fulbright grantees who took the FS route, as well as colleagues at the Embassy) seems to be to start out with a consular posting in China, then you often get posted somewhere totally different in the world, but then the third posting is usually somewhere else in greater China -- including Taipei, Hong Kong or Singapore (though typically competition for those is higher so the second posting back in China will be in a "less desirable" location like Shenyang or Chengdu).  As careers develop it seems pretty common to alternate between greater China postings and those elsewhere in the world.  There are also quite a few DC postings that would incorporate/take advantage of a focus on China.

These days you can get some very interesting China-related work globally -- I had one former grantee who had a great time in a posting in Africa because understanding China's Belt and Road development projects were part of their portfolio.

[elysianfields]

I randomly read this thread even though I'm not a fed. My DS is considering becoming a fed and more specifically doing foreign service if it lines up with his eventual degree. I was surprised to see there are so many foreign service people here! Would you recommend it in the present time?

I retired from the FS and loved my career, but different people have very different experiences. 

I think one of the problems is that very few people really understand what they're getting into unless they've grown up in a Foreign Service family or have worked in an Embassy.  Even talking at length to people you know in the Foreign Service only gives you a limited view.  Trust me, it is not like anything you see in movies. 

IMHO, the only reason to join the FS is because you want the lifestyle.  The lifestyle means moving every two or three years and seeing the world (and the world doesn't just mean London, Paris, and Brussels).  If you can't get genuinely excited about living in places like Astana, Bangkok, Nairobi, or Mexico City, it is not the life for you.  Choosing the Foreign Service lifestyle means two-thirds of your career overseas, so you are making a choice that you aren't normally going to be in the US for things like holidays and to support elderly relatives, and that your kids are not going to have a "normal" US childhood and connections with their extended relatives.  Foreign Service life usually means the spouse having to make some serious compromises on their own career.  The work of the Foreign Service is usually not conducive to specializing in a topic or region.  If you dream of being a specialist and spending a career in and about a single country like China, you will almost certainly be disappointed and unhappy.  If you join because you have a great interest in foreign policy, you will likely be even more disappointed.  Very few FSOs make foreign policy and for those few it usually comes late in the career.  If you join because you have visions of being an Ambassador, good luck.  Your chances (at least at the beginning) are as good as anyone's, but the opportunities are limited and the career cost will be high, with no guarantee  of ultimate success. 

Basically, you (and your family) have to want the lifestyle so much that it will counterbalance everything else.  Trust me; If you really want the lifestyle, there's almost nothing else you can do to replicate it.  If you don't love the lifestyle, nothing about the work will make it ok. 

BTW, if you and your husband are interested in the State Department Foreign Service, you might not have to wait for it to "line up with his eventual degree."  Having a specific degree has almost no relevance to getting into, or succeeding in, the Foreign Service as a generalist.  Technically, Foreign Service Officers don't even require a college degree.  State Foreign Service Specialists and USAID and Foreign Agricultural Service have different processes and requirements from State FSOs. 

For State, if you and your husband are interested, I would suggest starting the highly competitive and time consuming examination process now.  It commonly takes years from first taking the exam to onboarding for successful candidates, and you have nothing to lose by starting early. 

I did a full career and loved it.  I joined to see the world, meet interesting people, and have adventures, and I definitely got to do that.  Professionally, I was recognized and rewarded.  The job extracted some very high costs as well, but I have made my peace with them.  I have never wished I had done anything else.  YMMV. 

I encourage you to get as many firsthand opinions on FS life and career as possible.  I hope others on this thread will contribute, because their different experiences and views will give you a better perspective. 

I wish you only success in whatever you choose to do!

What @ROF Expat said.  It's not for everyone, you really need to like the lifestyle and deal with moving every few years.  It has worked well for us, though it has not always provided a smooth employment ride - like work everywhere, there are good and poor bosses and colleagues from time to time.

FS Officers usually "major" in one geographic region and "minor" in another, and learn a "world" host country language which they can apply to other countries in the region(s), a bit like @lhamo describes.  FS Specialists, including IT staff like me, can serve most anywhere.

On the financial front - this is a FIRE board after all - it's undeniable that a frugal FS employee can stack enough cheddar to retire reasonably well for a number of reasons, including USG-provided housing & utilities.  If you serve in "hardship" countries, you can receive a hardship differential, though it comes with places that have limited health resources, poor sanitation, limited infrastructure, and perhaps suffer from geographic isolation.

@fuzzy math and anyone else interested, check into Inside a U.S. Embassy: Diplomacy at Work, published by the American Foreign Service Association (AFSA), the professional association and collective bargaining unit of the Foreign Service.

[simonsez]

Did you know how sick leave affects your FER retirement?  I had thought that the months are added to the end of your service time to calculate your pension, so if you had 30 yr of work and 6 months sick leave, your pension would be calculated as if you worked 30 yrs and 6 months.  Not so!

For every 2,087 hours of sick leave, which is one year, your annuity is increased by 1%.  So if you get 3K a month, but have a year of sick leave, which take about 20 yrs to acquire, you get an extra 30 buck per month.  If you have 6 month of ick leave your annuity is increased by .5%, so for over a thousand hours of lave you get an extra 15 bucks a month.  Hardly seems worth it.

https://www.opm.gov/retirement-center/fers-information/creditable-service/

That link says unused SL counts as creditable service for the purposes of the FERS annuity computation.

https://www.opm.gov/retirement-center/fers-information/computation/

The computation instructions do not say anything along the lines of "calculate years worked first and multiply by HI-3, set that figure as 100%, and then add in a year's worth of unused SL as 1%".  It just says 1% (or 1.1%) for each year of service (which by my reading on the creditable service link would count unused SL) multiplied by your HI-3. 

Example: If someone's HI-3 was 100k and they worked 30 years (but retired before 62) and had 6 months of unused SL, their annual FERS amount in year 1 of retirement would be $30,500.

You're saying the amount would be $30,000 + 0.5%, which is $30,150.

I'm curious where you're reading/hearing anything to the contrary of the OPM materials.  Do you have any sources you can share?

[DeniseNJ]

Did you know how sick leave affects your FER retirement?  I had thought that the months are added to the end of your service time to calculate your pension, so if you had 30 yr of work and 6 months sick leave, your pension would be calculated as if you worked 30 yrs and 6 months.  Not so!

For every 2,087 hours of sick leave, which is one year, your annuity is increased by 1%.  So if you get 3K a month, but have a year of sick leave, which take about 20 yrs to acquire, you get an extra 30 buck per month.  If you have 6 month of ick leave your annuity is increased by .5%, so for over a thousand hours of lave you get an extra 15 bucks a month.  Hardly seems worth it.

https://www.opm.gov/retirement-center/fers-information/creditable-service/

That link says unused SL counts as creditable service for the purposes of the FERS annuity computation.
Unused Sick Leave under FERS can be used to increase an individual’s total creditable service for annuity computation purposes only;--this site doesn't mention how it's computed.

https://www.opm.gov/retirement-center/fers-information/computation/
This site doesn't mention sick leave at all.
The computation instructions do not say anything along the lines of "calculate years worked first and multiply by HI-3, set that figure as 100%, and then add in a year's worth of unused SL as 1%".  It just says 1% (or 1.1%) for each year of service (which by my reading on the creditable service link would count unused SL) multiplied by your HI-3. 

Example: If someone's HI-3 was 100k and they worked 30 years (but retired before 62) and had 6 months of unused SL, their annual FERS amount in year 1 of retirement would be $30,500.

You're saying the amount would be $30,000 + 0.5%, which is $30,150.

I'm curious where you're reading/hearing anything to the contrary of the OPM materials.  Do you have any sources you can share?

https://www.fedweek.com/experts-view/what-happens-to-sick-leave-at-retirement/#:~:text=If%20you%20are%20a%20FERS,0833%20percent.
From link above:
If you are a FERS retiree retiring under age 62 and/or with less than 20 years of service, a year of sick leave credit would increase your annuity by 1 percent, each month after that by .0833 percent

I can't find anything on OPM at all that says specifically how sick leave affects your annuity.  All OPM says is that it counts towards your annuity.  No specifics anywhere.  The link above is from FedWeek. 

I'm going to write to HR bc it seems like a well kept secret.  If anyone has another source or can shake it out of the OPM website, do let us know bc I really really hope I'm wrong.

[tj]

Use this calculator:

https://governmentworkerfi.com/sick-leave-retirement-calculator/

[Catbert]

Denise - You are wrong.  If you look a couple of  paragraph above what you highlighted in the Fedweek article, you'll see that unused sick leave is converted to months for annuity computation.  The reason 1 year of sick leave will get you an extra 1% of annuity is that each year of work credit is worth 1% of your H3.  For annuity computation a year of sick leave is work exactly what working one more year is worth.

[tj]

Obviously it is far more valuable to actually use the sick leave than to tack on the time to your pension.

[DeniseNJ]

Denise - You are wrong.  If you look a couple of  paragraph above what you highlighted in the Fedweek article, you'll see that unused sick leave is converted to months for annuity computation.  The reason 1 year of sick leave will get you an extra 1% of annuity is that each year of work credit is worth 1% of your H3.  For annuity computation a year of sick leave is work exactly what working one more year is worth.

All it says is: When you retire, unused sick leave will be converted into months for your annuity calculation.
"For your annuity calculation" doesn't mean it's added to credible service, it just means it is used to get to your final number.  And I see similar information when I try to look online. The example someone gives above shows it's not the same.

But then I just went on the GRB website and it says what I had originally thought, which a few ppl who just took a retirement seminar say isn't true, that the time is added to credible service.  So 30 yrs and 6 months of unused sick leave is 30.5 yrs of service.

Going to delete my original post so as not to disturb ppl if it isn't true.  I wrote to HR and will post their response.  Thanks.

[DeniseNJ]

Deleted my initial post so as not to confuse ppl or have bad info readily out there.

I had to go to the actual law to find it but I found this.
Section 1901 permits unused sick leave to be used as service credit in the computation of
benefits under FERS, but not for establishing title to an annuity or in the computation of
average salary. Sick leave will be used in the computations in the same manner it is used
in CSRS computations.

When I looked up how it's computed in CSRS, it says clearly it is added to your years of service!!  So 30 yrs with 6 months of unused sick leave is 30.5 yrs into the calculator.  Thank goodness!!!!

[simonsez]

@DeniseNJ all good, I'm glad it's been clarified.

Back in the early part of my career, a guy named Howie retired with a little over 38 years (on CSRS) and he had never used a single hour of SL.  He started while 19 or 20 and was out at 57/58.  He was able to get his creditable service up for his ~80% pension payout as a stepped out 15.  Back then a GS15-10 in DC made 150-155k IIRC so a pension of about 120k.  I remember being oddly inspired by that (opportunity cost of time and other life factors notwithstanding) as it was rare to find someone who tried to optimize anything relating to personal finance (as he maxed his TSP and Roth IRA as well), let alone be somewhat open to talking about it.  He hiked the Billy Goat trail (rocky hiking trail along the Potomac) every Saturday at 6am with a 50lb weighted vest on.  1st mentor, in a way, interesting guy and a very good manager.  But anyway, I was fairly sure how the unused SL was added on but good to be reassured.

[tj]

@DeniseNJ all good, I'm glad it's been clarified.

Back in the early part of my career, a guy named Howie retired with a little over 38 years (on CSRS) and he had never used a single hour of SL.  He started while 19 or 20 and was out at 57/58.  He was able to get his creditable service up for his ~80% pension payout as a stepped out 15.  Back then a GS15-10 in DC made 150-155k IIRC so a pension of about 120k.  I remember being oddly inspired by that (opportunity cost of time and other life factors notwithstanding) as it was rare to find someone who tried to optimize anything relating to personal finance (as he maxed his TSP and Roth IRA as well), let alone be somewhat open to talking about it.  He hiked the Billy Goat trail (rocky hiking trail along the Potomac) every Saturday at 6am with a 50lb weighted vest on.  1st mentor, in a way, interesting guy and a very good manager.  But anyway, I was fairly sure how the unused SL was added on but good to be reassured.

I'm surprised Roth IRA's existed when he was working.

[sparkytheop]

I'm going to throw this in on the sick leave conversion discussion.

There is the chart, and an easy to follow example here: https://www.usgs.gov/human-capital/sick-leave-conversion-chart

You can also find examples in the CSRS/FERS handbook, but you have to make sure you are following info for FERS, not CSRS, throughout all the chapters (maybe someday we'll get an updated FERS-only version to help reduce confusion.)  You can find the handbook here: https://www.opm.gov/retirement-center/publications-forms/csrsfers-handbook/

Even the OPM website has become a bit less reliable with their more recent updates.  I've found factually incorrect info in the last year or so, and their FAQ often leaves a lot to be desired, so it's been advantageous to get familiar with the handbook.

Also, one last mention.  For those who are *already* age 62-- if you do not yet have 20 years of service, but sick leave conversion can get you past the 20 year mark, the sick leave will qualify you for the 1.1% multiplier.  (source: https://www.opm.gov/retirement-center/publications-forms/benefits-administration-letters/2018/18-103.pdf )

[Monkey Uncle]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

[tj]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

[elysianfields]

Obviously it is far more valuable to actually use the sick leave than to tack on the time to your pension.

Indeed, I suggested this a few pages back and some seemed to misinterpret that, thinking I was proposing shirking.

If you take leave (sick or annual), you get paid for that leave and accumulate both more leave and time of service.
If you retire with a sick leave balance, it gets added to your ToS, but you don’t get paid for it.
If you retire with an annual leave balance, it gets paid out to you.

Consequently, if you need to consult with specialists before pulling the ripcord, it makes more sense from a financial and ToS point of view to take that sick leave before your retirement.

We have leave for a reason and I encourage people to take it for their mental and physical health.  Some supervisors tend to disagree; in particular my agency talks about work-life balance and focuses a lot on getting work done no matter the consequences, with employees often paying the price.

I also recommend not abusing the system and giving the taxpayer your devoted effort in exchange for your paycheck.

[elysianfields]

@DeniseNJ all good, I'm glad it's been clarified.

Back in the early part of my career, a guy named Howie retired with a little over 38 years (on CSRS) and he had never used a single hour of SL.  He started while 19 or 20 and was out at 57/58.  He was able to get his creditable service up for his ~80% pension payout as a stepped out 15.  Back then a GS15-10 in DC made 150-155k IIRC so a pension of about 120k.  I remember being oddly inspired by that (opportunity cost of time and other life factors notwithstanding) as it was rare to find someone who tried to optimize anything relating to personal finance (as he maxed his TSP and Roth IRA as well), let alone be somewhat open to talking about it.  He hiked the Billy Goat trail (rocky hiking trail along the Potomac) every Saturday at 6am with a 50lb weighted vest on.  1st mentor, in a way, interesting guy and a very good manager.  But anyway, I was fairly sure how the unused SL was added on but good to be reassured.

I'm surprised Roth IRA's existed when he was working.

Not sure when the person mentioned was working, and Roth IRAs were established by the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997.  Taxpayers could first open a Roth IRA in 1998.  Damn it, I’m getting old!

[Monkey Uncle]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

My ACA policy is better than the FEHB policy I had, and it currently costs me $0.  Of course there's the uncertainty associated with whether the Repubs will try to repeal the ACA again, but other than that it is a much better deal than FEHB.

[tj]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

My ACA policy is better than the FEHB policy I had, and it currently costs me $0.  Of course there's the uncertainty associated with whether the Repubs will try to repeal the ACA again, but other than that it is a much better deal than FEHB.

For the vast . majority of people, ACA is not going to be better than fehb. Fehb can be useful post Medicare age too, which ACA is not.

[ROF Expat]

My FEHB policy is far better for me than ACA, but YMMV. 

Personally, even if ACA worked better for me, I'd still be reluctant to give up FEHB.  Once you let it go, you can never get it back. 

BTW, I am a big supporter of ACA.  It is important to make health insurance available to everyone.  However, as long as FEHB will continue to pay the employer's share of my great private insurance, I will happily pay my share to keep it. 

[tj]

My FEHB policy is far better for me than ACA, but YMMV. 

Personally, even if ACA worked better for me, I'd still be reluctant to give up FEHB.  Once you let it go, you can never get it back. 

BTW, I am a big supporter of ACA.  It is important to make health insurance available to everyone.  However, as long as FEHB will continue to pay the employer's share of my great private insurance, I will happily pay my share to keep it.

If it was a matter of simply paying for it, that's a no brainer, but I'm not going to commit working an 15+ years just so I can keep it.

[Catbert]

Okay, now I feel compelled to tell my "use or lose" sick leave story.  This happened ~25 years ago, retiree was CSRS, and I was an HR Manager.

Never heard of "use or lose sick leave"?  Well, officially that term is never used.  It refers to the fact that your sick leave (and work time) is only included in retirement computations if it is a full month.  Somewhere around each 174 hours will give you a months credit or 2087 for 12 months.  Any leftover hours won't give you anything.  Some people don't want to leave any sick leave on the table so to them it's "use or lose".  If you try this you better be good at math.

As the result of a base closure, the employee retired the same day as the organization downsized and relocated 800 miles away.  I was at the gaining HR office (previous HRO was closed) so we had nothing to do with his retirement.  Several months later this employee discovered that he took too much sick leave and "lost" a months credit.  He started out to right this wrong that he'd inflicted on himself.  First he contacted OPM who said, we rely on payroll records given to use by central payroll office.  He then contacted payroll to see how he could retroactively substitute annual leave (which he'd been paid out for) for the "excess" sick leave.  They referred him to his supervisor and HRO.  After a few more twists, turns and buck passing he landed on my desk.  To do what he wanted we would have to request his paper personnel file from the records center, completely rebuild his entire online HR record,  get the payroll office to retroactively put him back in their system, find someone at the actively who was willing to make and certify timechard changes, etc.  Then re-retire the guy after that was all processed.  A lot of work for probably $5 a month for a problem of his own making.  That was an easy, "no" from me.  I was not willing to discuss or even give him sympathy.  He played stupid games and won a stupid prize.

 

[tj]

Okay, now I feel compelled to tell my "use or lose" sick leave story.  This happened ~25 years ago, retiree was CSRS, and I was an HR Manager.

Never heard of "use or lose sick leave"?  Well, officially that term is never used.  It refers to the fact that your sick leave (and work time) is only included in retirement computations if it is a full month.  Somewhere around each 174 hours will give you a months credit or 2087 for 12 months.  Any leftover hours won't give you anything.  Some people don't want to leave any sick leave on the table so to them it's "use or lose".  If you try this you better be good at math.

As the result of a base closure, the employee retired the same day as the organization downsized and relocated 800 miles away.  I was at the gaining HR office (previous HRO was closed) so we had nothing to do with his retirement.  Several months later this employee discovered that he took too much sick leave and "lost" a months credit.  He started out to right this wrong that he'd inflicted on himself.  First he contacted OPM who said, we rely on payroll records given to use by central payroll office.  He then contacted payroll to see how he could retroactively substitute annual leave (which he'd been paid out for) for the "excess" sick leave.  They referred him to his supervisor and HRO.  After a few more twists, turns and buck passing he landed on my desk.  To do what he wanted we would have to request his paper personnel file from the records center, completely rebuild his entire online HR record,  get the payroll office to retroactively put him back in their system, find someone at the actively who was willing to make and certify timechard changes, etc.  Then re-retire the guy after that was all processed.  A lot of work for probably $5 a month for a problem of his own making.  That was an easy, "no" from me.  I was not willing to discuss or even give him sympathy.  He played stupid games and won a stupid prize.

 

What a waste of time...He was better off taking the cash...

[Monkey Uncle]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

My ACA policy is better than the FEHB policy I had, and it currently costs me $0.  Of course there's the uncertainty associated with whether the Repubs will try to repeal the ACA again, but other than that it is a much better deal than FEHB.

For the vast . majority of people, ACA is not going to be better than fehb. Fehb can be useful post Medicare age too, which ACA is not.

Of course it is highly dependent on your personal situation.  If your state/county has good ACA plans available, and you can keep your MAGI down, ACA absolutely is better than FEHB.  I can get a top-notch BCBS plan for free, because (a) the plan is available in my area, and (b) I can manipulate my MAGI to max out the premium tax credit and cost sharing.  If your post-retirement income is high, or the ACA plans available in your area are crap, then yes, FEHB is likely to be better.  I would wager that for those who are staying until MRA or later, their income is probably going to be high enough that they should stick with FEHB.  But for those of us who FIREd early, we're probably better off sticking with ACA rather than going back to work just to get back on FEHB.

[tj]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

My ACA policy is better than the FEHB policy I had, and it currently costs me $0.  Of course there's the uncertainty associated with whether the Repubs will try to repeal the ACA again, but other than that it is a much better deal than FEHB.

For the vast . majority of people, ACA is not going to be better than fehb. Fehb can be useful post Medicare age too, which ACA is not.

Of course it is highly dependent on your personal situation.  If your state/county has good ACA plans available, and you can keep your MAGI down, ACA absolutely is better than FEHB.  I can get a top-notch BCBS plan for free, because (a) the plan is available in my area, and (b) I can manipulate my MAGI to max out the premium tax credit and cost sharing.  If your post-retirement income is high, or the ACA plans available in your area are crap, then yes, FEHB is likely to be better.  I would wager that for those who are staying until MRA or later, their income is probably going to be high enough that they should stick with FEHB.  But for those of us who FIREd early, we're probably better off sticking with ACA rather than going back to work just to get back on FEHB.

That depends entirely on where you live, and not particularly on how early you FIREd.

[elysianfields]

Okay, now I feel compelled to tell my "use or lose" sick leave story.  This happened ~25 years ago, retiree was CSRS, and I was an HR Manager.

Never heard of "use or lose sick leave"?  Well, officially that term is never used.  It refers to the fact that your sick leave (and work time) is only included in retirement computations if it is a full month.  Somewhere around each 174 hours will give you a months credit or 2087 for 12 months.  Any leftover hours won't give you anything.  Some people don't want to leave any sick leave on the table so to them it's "use or lose".  If you try this you better be good at math.

As the result of a base closure, the employee retired the same day as the organization downsized and relocated 800 miles away.  I was at the gaining HR office (previous HRO was closed) so we had nothing to do with his retirement.  Several months later this employee discovered that he took too much sick leave and "lost" a months credit.  He started out to right this wrong that he'd inflicted on himself.  First he contacted OPM who said, we rely on payroll records given to use by central payroll office.  He then contacted payroll to see how he could retroactively substitute annual leave (which he'd been paid out for) for the "excess" sick leave.  They referred him to his supervisor and HRO.  After a few more twists, turns and buck passing he landed on my desk.  To do what he wanted we would have to request his paper personnel file from the records center, completely rebuild his entire online HR record,  get the payroll office to retroactively put him back in their system, find someone at the actively who was willing to make and certify timechard changes, etc.  Then re-retire the guy after that was all processed.  A lot of work for probably $5 a month for a problem of his own making.  That was an easy, "no" from me.  I was not willing to discuss or even give him sympathy.  He played stupid games and won a stupid prize.

 

What a waste of time...He was better off taking the cash...

@Catbert thanks for the warning, one should read the regulations carefully, and I don’t blame you for not processing everything retroactively.

@tj there’s no cash payout for sick leave, and in Catbert’s telling, the employee in question received the payout for his annual leave.

But does it make sense to cry over $5 / month in spilled milk in any case?

A propos, I found this online calculator at FedWeek: Calculating Service Credit for Sick Leave at Retirement. The important point remains that your pension is based on years and full months of service.  If you have an extra 28 days of service, for example, they don’t count toward your pension.

And this article from FedSmith discusses a cursory example but at least gives the link to the OPM sick leave conversion chart: Should I use my annual leave or sick leave right before retirement?.

[elysianfields]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

My ACA policy is better than the FEHB policy I had, and it currently costs me $0.  Of course there's the uncertainty associated with whether the Repubs will try to repeal the ACA again, but other than that it is a much better deal than FEHB.

For the vast . majority of people, ACA is not going to be better than fehb. Fehb can be useful post Medicare age too, which ACA is not.

Of course it is highly dependent on your personal situation.  If your state/county has good ACA plans available, and you can keep your MAGI down, ACA absolutely is better than FEHB.  I can get a top-notch BCBS plan for free, because (a) the plan is available in my area, and (b) I can manipulate my MAGI to max out the premium tax credit and cost sharing.  If your post-retirement income is high, or the ACA plans available in your area are crap, then yes, FEHB is likely to be better.  I would wager that for those who are staying until MRA or later, their income is probably going to be high enough that they should stick with FEHB.  But for those of us who FIREd early, we're probably better off sticking with ACA rather than going back to work just to get back on FEHB.

That all makes sense to me.  @Monkey Uncle you resigned before your MRA, so you’re not receiving a pension, it makes sense that you can keep your MAGI low enough to qualify for a good ACA.

We are the same boat as @ROF Expat, expect two federal pension incomes, hope to convert Traditional retirement funds to Roth, all of which add to our MAGI.  For us FEHB makes lots of sense, particularly if we look to spend much of our retirement outside the U.S., where every provider is in-network.

[tj]

Okay, now I feel compelled to tell my "use or lose" sick leave story.  This happened ~25 years ago, retiree was CSRS, and I was an HR Manager.

Never heard of "use or lose sick leave"?  Well, officially that term is never used.  It refers to the fact that your sick leave (and work time) is only included in retirement computations if it is a full month.  Somewhere around each 174 hours will give you a months credit or 2087 for 12 months.  Any leftover hours won't give you anything.  Some people don't want to leave any sick leave on the table so to them it's "use or lose".  If you try this you better be good at math.

As the result of a base closure, the employee retired the same day as the organization downsized and relocated 800 miles away.  I was at the gaining HR office (previous HRO was closed) so we had nothing to do with his retirement.  Several months later this employee discovered that he took too much sick leave and "lost" a months credit.  He started out to right this wrong that he'd inflicted on himself.  First he contacted OPM who said, we rely on payroll records given to use by central payroll office.  He then contacted payroll to see how he could retroactively substitute annual leave (which he'd been paid out for) for the "excess" sick leave.  They referred him to his supervisor and HRO.  After a few more twists, turns and buck passing he landed on my desk.  To do what he wanted we would have to request his paper personnel file from the records center, completely rebuild his entire online HR record,  get the payroll office to retroactively put him back in their system, find someone at the actively who was willing to make and certify timechard changes, etc.  Then re-retire the guy after that was all processed.  A lot of work for probably $5 a month for a problem of his own making.  That was an easy, "no" from me.  I was not willing to discuss or even give him sympathy.  He played stupid games and won a stupid prize.

 

What a waste of time...He was better off taking the cash...

@Catbert thanks for the warning, one should read the regulations carefully, and I don’t blame you for not processing everything retroactively.

@tj there’s no cash payout for sick leave, and in Catbert’s telling, the employee in question received the payout for his annual leave.

But does it make sense to cry over $5 / month in spilled milk in any case?

A propos, I found this online calculator at FedWeek: Calculating Service Credit for Sick Leave at Retirement. The important point remains that your pension is based on years and full months of service.  If you have an extra 28 days of service, for example, they don’t count toward your pension.

And this article from FedSmith discusses a cursory example but at least gives the link to the OPM sick leave conversion chart: Should I use my annual leave or sick leave right before retirement?.

The "cash payout" is taking the sick leave which extends your time in service and accrues more AL, gives you extra time of fehb that is deducted pre tax... essentially it's better to burn it than to tack on the time. Of course that requires you to be sick.

[Monkey Uncle]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

My ACA policy is better than the FEHB policy I had, and it currently costs me $0.  Of course there's the uncertainty associated with whether the Repubs will try to repeal the ACA again, but other than that it is a much better deal than FEHB.

For the vast . majority of people, ACA is not going to be better than fehb. Fehb can be useful post Medicare age too, which ACA is not.

Of course it is highly dependent on your personal situation.  If your state/county has good ACA plans available, and you can keep your MAGI down, ACA absolutely is better than FEHB.  I can get a top-notch BCBS plan for free, because (a) the plan is available in my area, and (b) I can manipulate my MAGI to max out the premium tax credit and cost sharing.  If your post-retirement income is high, or the ACA plans available in your area are crap, then yes, FEHB is likely to be better.  I would wager that for those who are staying until MRA or later, their income is probably going to be high enough that they should stick with FEHB.  But for those of us who FIREd early, we're probably better off sticking with ACA rather than going back to work just to get back on FEHB.

That all makes sense to me.  @Monkey Uncle you resigned before your MRA, so you’re not receiving a pension, it makes sense that you can keep your MAGI low enough to qualify for a good ACA.

We are the same boat as @ROF Expat, expect two federal pension incomes, hope to convert Traditional retirement funds to Roth, all of which add to our MAGI.  For us FEHB makes lots of sense, particularly if we look to spend much of our retirement outside the U.S., where every provider is in-network.

I will start receiving a pension in about a year and a half, but it will be small, and I expect I will still be able to manage my MAGI pretty well.  Once I hit SS eligibility, it might get harder, but that's only a few years before Medicare.

[Monkey Uncle]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

My ACA policy is better than the FEHB policy I had, and it currently costs me $0.  Of course there's the uncertainty associated with whether the Repubs will try to repeal the ACA again, but other than that it is a much better deal than FEHB.

For the vast . majority of people, ACA is not going to be better than fehb. Fehb can be useful post Medicare age too, which ACA is not.

Of course it is highly dependent on your personal situation.  If your state/county has good ACA plans available, and you can keep your MAGI down, ACA absolutely is better than FEHB.  I can get a top-notch BCBS plan for free, because (a) the plan is available in my area, and (b) I can manipulate my MAGI to max out the premium tax credit and cost sharing.  If your post-retirement income is high, or the ACA plans available in your area are crap, then yes, FEHB is likely to be better.  I would wager that for those who are staying until MRA or later, their income is probably going to be high enough that they should stick with FEHB.  But for those of us who FIREd early, we're probably better off sticking with ACA rather than going back to work just to get back on FEHB.

That depends entirely on where you live, and not particularly on how early you FIREd.

As elysianfields pointed out, those who retire at a more normal age are less likely to be able to manage their MAGI to keep the cost of an ACA policy low.

[tj]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

My ACA policy is better than the FEHB policy I had, and it currently costs me $0.  Of course there's the uncertainty associated with whether the Repubs will try to repeal the ACA again, but other than that it is a much better deal than FEHB.

For the vast . majority of people, ACA is not going to be better than fehb. Fehb can be useful post Medicare age too, which ACA is not.

Of course it is highly dependent on your personal situation.  If your state/county has good ACA plans available, and you can keep your MAGI down, ACA absolutely is better than FEHB.  I can get a top-notch BCBS plan for free, because (a) the plan is available in my area, and (b) I can manipulate my MAGI to max out the premium tax credit and cost sharing.  If your post-retirement income is high, or the ACA plans available in your area are crap, then yes, FEHB is likely to be better.  I would wager that for those who are staying until MRA or later, their income is probably going to be high enough that they should stick with FEHB.  But for those of us who FIREd early, we're probably better off sticking with ACA rather than going back to work just to get back on FEHB.

That depends entirely on where you live, and not particularly on how early you FIREd.

As elysianfields pointed out, those who retire at a more normal age are less likely to be able to manage their MAGI to keep the cost of an ACA policy low.

And as I pointed out, it depends entirely on where you live and not how early you fired.

[Monkey Uncle]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

My ACA policy is better than the FEHB policy I had, and it currently costs me $0.  Of course there's the uncertainty associated with whether the Repubs will try to repeal the ACA again, but other than that it is a much better deal than FEHB.

For the vast . majority of people, ACA is not going to be better than fehb. Fehb can be useful post Medicare age too, which ACA is not.

Of course it is highly dependent on your personal situation.  If your state/county has good ACA plans available, and you can keep your MAGI down, ACA absolutely is better than FEHB.  I can get a top-notch BCBS plan for free, because (a) the plan is available in my area, and (b) I can manipulate my MAGI to max out the premium tax credit and cost sharing.  If your post-retirement income is high, or the ACA plans available in your area are crap, then yes, FEHB is likely to be better.  I would wager that for those who are staying until MRA or later, their income is probably going to be high enough that they should stick with FEHB.  But for those of us who FIREd early, we're probably better off sticking with ACA rather than going back to work just to get back on FEHB.

That depends entirely on where you live, and not particularly on how early you FIREd.

As elysianfields pointed out, those who retire at a more normal age are less likely to be able to manage their MAGI to keep the cost of an ACA policy low.

And as I pointed out, it depends entirely on where you live and not how early you fired.

I'm really not looking to perpetuate a nit-picky argument.  But I feel compelled to point out that it doesn't depend entirely on where you live.  It depends on where you live and how early you FIREd.  And I would guess that location might not be as important as you think.  If you have BCBS plans available through the ACA where you live, you probably have at least one option that is as comprehensive as anything you can get through FEHB.

[DeniseNJ]

As someone mentioned above somewhere, you can't get an ACA plan once you are eligible for Medicare.  FEHB is way better than Medicare.  I mean it's not worth working 10 yrs longer but if you're counting on ACA, you should factor in that you might spend 30 years on Medicare.  Think of how that affects your travel, as they generally don't cover you out of the country. They don't have family plans.  Each person pays their own premium.  They only cover 80% so you need a supplement plan. And they don't cover dental, hearing, or vision. Or you need an HMO plan which is restricted by area.  And the premium goes way up with your income too. 

Don't compare FEHB with ACA--compare it with Medicare since that's what you'll have the last third of your life.

[Monkey Uncle]

As someone mentioned above somewhere, you can't get an ACA plan once you are eligible for Medicare.  FEHB is way better than Medicare.  I mean it's not worth working 10 yrs longer but if you're counting on ACA, you should factor in that you might spend 30 years on Medicare.  Think of how that affects your travel, as they generally don't cover you out of the country. They don't have family plans.  Each person pays their own premium.  They only cover 80% so you need a supplement plan. And they don't cover dental, hearing, or vision. Or you need an HMO plan which is restricted by area.  And the premium goes way up with your income too. 

Don't compare FEHB with ACA--compare it with Medicare since that's what you'll have the last third of your life.

Yes, my wife is already on Medicare, so I'm familiar with how it works.  She is on traditional Medicare with a Part B supplement that covers everything except the deductible (currently $240), plus she has a Part D prescription drug plan.  Her all-in costs for Part B premium, supplement premium, Part D premium, and Part B deductible add up to $3,786.  Not too bad considering that she has no other OOP costs beyond Rx drug co-pays.  Currently those are a pittance, but of course they could get more expensive in the future depending on the course of her health.  If my costs ended up being similar, we'd be spending $7,572 a year on health care, all in except for drugs.  I looked up the 2024 self +1 FEHB premiums for the BCBS standard plan, which almost certainly has much higher OOP expenses.  The employee contribution is $8,758 per year.

Of course Medicare is likely to get more expensive as we get older, due to the age rating on the part B supplement and the likelihood that we will spend more on Rx drugs.  I'm not claiming that it will be better than FEHB throughout retirement.  But it's definitely not a situation where I feel compelled to go back to work just to get back on FEHB.

[tj]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

My ACA policy is better than the FEHB policy I had, and it currently costs me $0.  Of course there's the uncertainty associated with whether the Repubs will try to repeal the ACA again, but other than that it is a much better deal than FEHB.

For the vast . majority of people, ACA is not going to be better than fehb. Fehb can be useful post Medicare age too, which ACA is not.

Of course it is highly dependent on your personal situation.  If your state/county has good ACA plans available, and you can keep your MAGI down, ACA absolutely is better than FEHB.  I can get a top-notch BCBS plan for free, because (a) the plan is available in my area, and (b) I can manipulate my MAGI to max out the premium tax credit and cost sharing.  If your post-retirement income is high, or the ACA plans available in your area are crap, then yes, FEHB is likely to be better.  I would wager that for those who are staying until MRA or later, their income is probably going to be high enough that they should stick with FEHB.  But for those of us who FIREd early, we're probably better off sticking with ACA rather than going back to work just to get back on FEHB.

That depends entirely on where you live, and not particularly on how early you FIREd.

As elysianfields pointed out, those who retire at a more normal age are less likely to be able to manage their MAGI to keep the cost of an ACA policy low.

And as I pointed out, it depends entirely on where you live and not how early you fired.

I'm really not looking to perpetuate a nit-picky argument.  But I feel compelled to point out that it doesn't depend entirely on where you live.  It depends on where you live and how early you FIREd.  And I would guess that location might not be as important as you think.  If you have BCBS plans available through the ACA where you live, you probably have at least one option that is as comprehensive as anything you can get through FEHB.

No - that is exactly the issue - Arizona Blue, for example, only has a statewide PPO - anything out of state except for emergenicies is out of network. This is very different than FEPBlue which is nationwide with a massive network.  A lot of states don't even have PPO's. Also that Arizona plan has like a $200/mo premium for those with max subsidies.

ACA is really, really bad in a lot of areas. If you live somewhere where it is not bad, you are the exception, not the rule.

[tj]

As someone mentioned above somewhere, you can't get an ACA plan once you are eligible for Medicare.  FEHB is way better than Medicare.  I mean it's not worth working 10 yrs longer but if you're counting on ACA, you should factor in that you might spend 30 years on Medicare.  Think of how that affects your travel, as they generally don't cover you out of the country. They don't have family plans.  Each person pays their own premium.  They only cover 80% so you need a supplement plan. And they don't cover dental, hearing, or vision. Or you need an HMO plan which is restricted by area.  And the premium goes way up with your income too. 

Don't compare FEHB with ACA--compare it with Medicare since that's what you'll have the last third of your life.

Have to think they'll eventually make Medicare mandatory for retired feds just like they did with the postal retirees and the military retirees.

[Monkey Uncle]

It's worth pointing out that for those of us who did not hang on until MRA, unused sick leave doesn't count toward years of service for calculating a deferred annuity.  Unless we go back to work and have our sick leave reinstated, and then retire.  Which in my case ain't gonna happen for an extra 500 bucks a year.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-administration/fact-sheets/sick-leave-general-information/

(Scroll down to "sick leave used in the computation of an annuity," and "recredit of sick leave.")

Doing that is worth way more than $500/year though, because it would allow you to reinstate FEHB and keep it for the rest of your life.

My ACA policy is better than the FEHB policy I had, and it currently costs me $0.  Of course there's the uncertainty associated with whether the Repubs will try to repeal the ACA again, but other than that it is a much better deal than FEHB.

For the vast . majority of people, ACA is not going to be better than fehb. Fehb can be useful post Medicare age too, which ACA is not.

Of course it is highly dependent on your personal situation.  If your state/county has good ACA plans available, and you can keep your MAGI down, ACA absolutely is better than FEHB.  I can get a top-notch BCBS plan for free, because (a) the plan is available in my area, and (b) I can manipulate my MAGI to max out the premium tax credit and cost sharing.  If your post-retirement income is high, or the ACA plans available in your area are crap, then yes, FEHB is likely to be better.  I would wager that for those who are staying until MRA or later, their income is probably going to be high enough that they should stick with FEHB.  But for those of us who FIREd early, we're probably better off sticking with ACA rather than going back to work just to get back on FEHB.

That depends entirely on where you live, and not particularly on how early you FIREd.

As elysianfields pointed out, those who retire at a more normal age are less likely to be able to manage their MAGI to keep the cost of an ACA policy low.

And as I pointed out, it depends entirely on where you live and not how early you fired.

I'm really not looking to perpetuate a nit-picky argument.  But I feel compelled to point out that it doesn't depend entirely on where you live.  It depends on where you live and how early you FIREd.  And I would guess that location might not be as important as you think.  If you have BCBS plans available through the ACA where you live, you probably have at least one option that is as comprehensive as anything you can get through FEHB.

No - that is exactly the issue - Arizona Blue, for example, only has a statewide PPO - anything out of state except for emergenicies is out of network. This is very different than FEPBlue which is nationwide with a massive network.  A lot of states don't even have PPO's. Also that Arizona plan has like a $200/mo premium for those with max subsidies.

ACA is really, really bad in a lot of areas. If you live somewhere where it is not bad, you are the exception, not the rule.

I wouldn't call that example really, really bad.  I pretended I live in Phoenix and plugged in my personal numbers and saw that I can get a comprehensive BCBS Silver plan for $0 per month with an OOP limit of $1,800 and minimal per-visit co-pays.  They claim the "largest PPO network in Arizona."  They do offer out of network coverage at a higher co-pay percentage, which is something I could not get with the last FEHB BCBS plan I had (granted, that was 7 years ago, and may have changed).  It says they don't have an out of state network, but I couldn't tell from the summary information available whether you could get the out of network co-pay rate for out of state care, or if it is just emergency only.  Regardless, most folks aren't looking for non-emergency care when they're traveling.

I'm sure we could find many areas of the country where the ACA options truly are all bad.  But not all offerings in all areas are bad, and I haven't seen any evidence to indicate that the vast majority of areas have no good plans (not sure how you would even find such evidence without exhaustively searching through all of the ACA offerings across the country).  The point here is that if someone is holding on until MRA because of FEHB, they should evaluate the options available to them and run the numbers for themselves, rather than just assume, based on what "everyone says," that FEHB is their only good option for health insurance.

[DeniseNJ]

As someone mentioned above somewhere, you can't get an ACA plan once you are eligible for Medicare.  FEHB is way better than Medicare.  I mean it's not worth working 10 yrs longer but if you're counting on ACA, you should factor in that you might spend 30 years on Medicare.  Think of how that affects your travel, as they generally don't cover you out of the country. They don't have family plans.  Each person pays their own premium.  They only cover 80% so you need a supplement plan. And they don't cover dental, hearing, or vision. Or you need an HMO plan which is restricted by area.  And the premium goes way up with your income too. 

Don't compare FEHB with ACA--compare it with Medicare since that's what you'll have the last third of your life.

Have to think they'll eventually make Medicare mandatory for retired feds just like they did with the postal retirees and the military retirees.

I'm sure they will since it generally isn't as good.  Federal retirees with annuities will find it harder to keep their income under a certain threshold.  Once IRMAA kicks in, you  start paying more for Parts B and D, but your FEHB premiums remain the same.

[DeniseNJ]

As someone mentioned above somewhere, you can't get an ACA plan once you are eligible for Medicare.  FEHB is way better than Medicare.  I mean it's not worth working 10 yrs longer but if you're counting on ACA, you should factor in that you might spend 30 years on Medicare.  Think of how that affects your travel, as they generally don't cover you out of the country. They don't have family plans.  Each person pays their own premium.  They only cover 80% so you need a supplement plan. And they don't cover dental, hearing, or vision. Or you need an HMO plan which is restricted by area.  And the premium goes way up with your income too. 

Don't compare FEHB with ACA--compare it with Medicare since that's what you'll have the last third of your life.

Yes, my wife is already on Medicare, so I'm familiar with how it works.  She is on traditional Medicare with a Part B supplement that covers everything except the deductible (currently $240), plus she has a Part D prescription drug plan.  Her all-in costs for Part B premium, supplement premium, Part D premium, and Part B deductible add up to $3,786.  Not too bad considering that she has no other OOP costs beyond Rx drug co-pays.  Currently those are a pittance, but of course they could get more expensive in the future depending on the course of her health.  If my costs ended up being similar, we'd be spending $7,572 a year on health care, all in except for drugs.  I looked up the 2024 self +1 FEHB premiums for the BCBS standard plan, which almost certainly has much higher OOP expenses.  The employee contribution is $8,758 per year.

Of course Medicare is likely to get more expensive as we get older, due to the age rating on the part B supplement and the likelihood that we will spend more on Rx drugs.  I'm not claiming that it will be better than FEHB throughout retirement.  But it's definitely not a situation where I feel compelled to go back to work just to get back on FEHB.

Consider IRMAA as your income increases with your annuity and SS payments.  FEHB stays the same but Medicare premiums go up quite a bit.  Still not worth unretiring for but still something to think about.

[Catbert]

As someone mentioned above somewhere, you can't get an ACA plan once you are eligible for Medicare.  FEHB is way better than Medicare.  I mean it's not worth working 10 yrs longer but if you're counting on ACA, you should factor in that you might spend 30 years on Medicare.  Think of how that affects your travel, as they generally don't cover you out of the country. They don't have family plans.  Each person pays their own premium.  They only cover 80% so you need a supplement plan. And they don't cover dental, hearing, or vision. Or you need an HMO plan which is restricted by area.  And the premium goes way up with your income too. 

Don't compare FEHB with ACA--compare it with Medicare since that's what you'll have the last third of your life.

Have to think they'll eventually make Medicare mandatory for retired feds just like they did with the postal retirees and the military retirees.

Maybe, however remember who else is covered by FEHB.  Congress.  So our chances of staying in FEHB are better than postal workers or the military.

[Monkey Uncle]

As someone mentioned above somewhere, you can't get an ACA plan once you are eligible for Medicare.  FEHB is way better than Medicare.  I mean it's not worth working 10 yrs longer but if you're counting on ACA, you should factor in that you might spend 30 years on Medicare.  Think of how that affects your travel, as they generally don't cover you out of the country. They don't have family plans.  Each person pays their own premium.  They only cover 80% so you need a supplement plan. And they don't cover dental, hearing, or vision. Or you need an HMO plan which is restricted by area.  And the premium goes way up with your income too. 

Don't compare FEHB with ACA--compare it with Medicare since that's what you'll have the last third of your life.

Yes, my wife is already on Medicare, so I'm familiar with how it works.  She is on traditional Medicare with a Part B supplement that covers everything except the deductible (currently $240), plus she has a Part D prescription drug plan.  Her all-in costs for Part B premium, supplement premium, Part D premium, and Part B deductible add up to $3,786.  Not too bad considering that she has no other OOP costs beyond Rx drug co-pays.  Currently those are a pittance, but of course they could get more expensive in the future depending on the course of her health.  If my costs ended up being similar, we'd be spending $7,572 a year on health care, all in except for drugs.  I looked up the 2024 self +1 FEHB premiums for the BCBS standard plan, which almost certainly has much higher OOP expenses.  The employee contribution is $8,758 per year.

Of course Medicare is likely to get more expensive as we get older, due to the age rating on the part B supplement and the likelihood that we will spend more on Rx drugs.  I'm not claiming that it will be better than FEHB throughout retirement.  But it's definitely not a situation where I feel compelled to go back to work just to get back on FEHB.

Consider IRMAA as your income increases with your annuity and SS payments.  FEHB stays the same but Medicare premiums go up quite a bit.  Still not worth unretiring for but still something to think about.

Unless I hit the powerball jackpot, my MAGI will never be anywhere close to IRMAA levels.