On 1 Jan 2018, will you stick with the current military retirement plan or join the new Blended Retirement System?

American Armed Forces Mutual Aid Association — Wed, 05 Apr 2017 15:58:38 -0400

Not sure what to do? Join AAFMAA on 27 April for a free webinar about how to decide.

Response by CW4 Guy Butler made Apr 5 at 2017 4:33 PM

CW4 Guy Butler — Wed, 05 Apr 2017 16:33:08 -0400

Current plan; I'm up to 65% pay for retirement.

Response by CPT Laurie H. made Apr 5 at 2017 4:35 PM

CPT Laurie H. — Wed, 05 Apr 2017 16:35:52 -0400

This should be a great resource for those of us who have no idea what we're doing!

Response by SFC Craig Dalen made Apr 5 at 2017 4:52 PM

SFC Craig Dalen — Wed, 05 Apr 2017 16:52:26 -0400

Stick with the old

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 5 at 2017 5:15 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 05 Apr 2017 17:15:32 -0400

Traditional for me.

Response by TSgt Joe C. made Apr 5 at 2017 5:32 PM

TSgt Joe C. — Wed, 05 Apr 2017 17:32:44 -0400

Current system for me.

Response by Capt Brandon Charters made Apr 5 at 2017 6:54 PM

Capt Brandon Charters — Wed, 05 Apr 2017 18:54:51 -0400

What are the biggest differences in the two systems? Curious how everyone is making their decision.

Response by LTC Steve Mannell made Apr 5 at 2017 7:23 PM

LTC Steve Mannell — Wed, 05 Apr 2017 19:23:21 -0400

Click the "Visit Sponsor" link to sign up for the webinar. I've heard Mike Meese give an early version of this presentation, and he does a great job of laying out the key decision variables.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Apr 6 at 2017 12:13 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Thu, 06 Apr 2017 12:13:23 -0400

It is imperative to receive proper education on the new retirement system.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 6 at 2017 12:28 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 06 Apr 2017 12:28:27 -0400

Traditional. Being almost at 20, it just isn't worth it to cut my pension from 2.5% per year of service down to 2.0%, since the TSP contribution in those remaining years will be pennies.

Response by SGT Aaron Atwood made Apr 7 at 2017 11:20 PM

SGT Aaron Atwood — Fri, 07 Apr 2017 23:20:27 -0400

I appreciate the training available so we can make an informed decision on the new Blended Retirement System. It would be nice, however, to see an equally good and thorough amount of info in regards to the Legacy (old) system as well. I like the diversity the BRS brings but I don't like not knowing as much about the old system as I now know the new.

Response by Capt Tom Brown made Apr 9 at 2017 8:59 PM

Capt Tom Brown — Sun, 09 Apr 2017 20:59:20 -0400

Anyone near retirement under the old system might be inclined to stay with the old system because it is a known quantity and pretty well 'guaranteed' - eg 50% after 20 yrs, no risk involved etc. People just getting started should avail themselves of the new blended system and make the most of it. 99% of the private sector has no retirement system at all and the 1% who do are among the elite. Everyone else must save save save whatever pennies they can and hope for the best. The guaranteed return from even the blended system will provide extra incentive to save save save every penny possible.
Savings can more than make up the reduced guaranteed retirement % under the new system. Good luck and best wishes..

Response by CPT Jacob Swartout made Apr 17 at 2017 11:56 PM

CPT Jacob Swartout — Mon, 17 Apr 2017 23:56:34 -0400

I'll stay with the current system.

Response by SFC George Smith made Apr 18 at 2017 8:59 PM

SFC George Smith — Tue, 18 Apr 2017 20:59:30 -0400

It's a shame... The media is more impressed with the shooters than the Victims...

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2017 12:14 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 21 Apr 2017 12:14:38 -0400

Old system allowed for up to 100% base pay upon retirement which can be as early as 57 years of age. It seems that everyone only compares the two against only 20 years.

Response by CPT Aaron Kletzing made Apr 22 at 2017 10:06 PM

CPT Aaron Kletzing — Sat, 22 Apr 2017 22:06:27 -0400

If I was still serving, I would be asking tons of questions on how to figure out my retirement system decisions

Response by Capt Tom Brown made Apr 23 at 2017 10:02 AM

Capt Tom Brown — Sun, 23 Apr 2017 10:02:10 -0400

http://www.militarytimes.com/articles/guest-commentary-military-blended-retirement-west-point

Another resource for comparing the two alternatives. Stay with what you got, or try something new and take a risk?

guest-commentary-military-blended-retirement-west-point

Response by PO1 Michael Fullmer made Apr 25 at 2017 6:51 PM

PO1 Michael Fullmer — Tue, 25 Apr 2017 18:51:35 -0400

SO glad I don't have to choose.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2017 10:35 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:35:25 -0400

I'm sticking with the current one.

Response by Sgt Jay Jones made Apr 26 at 2017 10:46 AM

Sgt Jay Jones — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 10:46:26 -0400

After I was discharged from the Marine Corps in 1974 I was able to obtain employment from the Federal Aviation Administration a U.S. Government agency.

At the time Federal Employees were placed into a retirement system called Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). Under this retirement system you were able to retire at the age of fifty-five (55) and twenty-seven (27) years of service and receive 50% of the highest five (5) year income. Of course depending upon you Civil Service "GS/GM" grade annuities were appropriately reflected. if a person retired at the minimum eligibility and their high five (5) year average was $80,000.00, that person would receive $40,000.00, in their annuity, plus any unused sick leave could be added to increase their percentage. This was an incentive to conserve a person's sick leave to increase their retirement. Anything over twenty-seven (27) years and fifty-five) 55 years of age would increase their annuity by two (2) percent per year. As an example, if an employee was hired when they were eighteen (18) years of age they would be required to work until they were fifty-five (55), however, that employee met the years requirement at the age of forty-five (45). So, this employee would have to work a minimum of ten (10) years to reach the minimum retirement age of fifty-five (55). Since this was years of service exceeded the minimum of twenty-seven (27) years. This employee would receive an addition two (2) percent per years base on total years of service. So, this employee instead of retiring at fifty-five years of age with $40,000.00. The additional two (2) percent would add a total of twenty (20) for a retirement annuity based on seventy (70) percent of their high five, which is $56,000.00.

In 1987 the Federal Government went to a new retirement system called Federal Employees Retirement System. This was a three (3) tier system with was based of a thirty-three (33) percent of your high three; Social Security which Federal Employees did not participate in under CSRS; and finally the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) which is based how much you contribute to the stock market and it's return at the time of your retirement.

Employees under CSRS were encourage to change to the new FERS system.

My thoughts were if they are changing a system it is not to my advantage, but instead to save money.

Then I asked the question, "If I change to FERS and later decide I don't like it. Can I return back to CSRS? The answer was "No".

Needless to say I elected to remain under CSRS. Another addendum, under FERS, a person get no credit for saved sick leave. Thus we had increased usage of sick leave with affects all agencies efficiently.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Apr 26 at 2017 11:51 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 11:51:17 -0400

Thank God I am Retired.

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Apr 26 at 2017 12:51 PM

SMSgt Thor Merich — Wed, 26 Apr 2017 12:51:08 -0400

I am sticking with the old system. But if I had only a few years in, I might seriously consider the new system.

Response by SFC John Smithman made Apr 27 at 2017 1:28 AM

SFC John Smithman — Thu, 27 Apr 2017 01:28:54 -0400

I just retired. I earn $2566 a month in retirement after deducting taxes, SBP, TRICARE, & VGLI. I receive $2177 a month in VA SC disability. I also use the Post 9/11 GI Bill to receive $2701 a month for 9 months a year. Earning $81,243 a year is not bad!

I retired in 2017. I was an E-7 with 25 years. I was rated 90% by the VA and I am attending UMUC while residing overseas permanently in Europe.

UMUC pays $2301 per month because their zip code is in the Maryland/DC area. It's a high cost area just like Europe. I also get a "kicker" of an extra $400 per month because I initially enlisted under the Montgomery GI Bill and into a critical skills MOS. Hence $2301 + $400 = $2701. Life is good. :)

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 27 at 2017 9:49 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Apr 2017 09:49:41 -0400

Since I hit 20 years this year, I clearly won't be changing, although I am deeply concerned that 20 years from now Congress will de-grandfather the "old-school" retirees. I already see grumbling about our "generous 50% of pay retirement" from civilians who don't understand that in places like California, we really receive ~35% of our pre-retirement income.

Response by PO1 J Lewis made Apr 27 at 2017 9:39 PM

PO1 J Lewis — Thu, 27 Apr 2017 21:39:18 -0400

So glad I joined in 1979 before they began fucking with the retirement system in the 80's