C.F.R. » Title 5 » CHAPTER I—OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT › SUBCHAPTER B—CIVIL SERVICE REGULATIONS › PART 842—FEDERAL EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM—BASIC ANNUITY › Subpart E—Annuity Supplement

5 C.F.R. § 842.505

Reduction in annuity supplement because of excess earnings

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(2) and (b) of this section, the annuity supplement payable under § 842.504 is reduced by excess earnings in the test year, divided by twelve.

(2) Any annuity supplement payable during the year in which an individual loses entitlement to the annuity supplement by reason of § 842.503(c) is reduced by excess earnings in the test year divided by the number of months for which the annuity supplement is payable.

(b) Any reduction in the annuity supplement during a month because of excess earnings may not exceed the amount of annuity supplement payable during that month.

(c) Earnings and estimated earnings for each test year will be furnished by retirees in a form prescribed by OPM.

(d) Failure to furnish earnings and estimated earnings in the form or at the times prescribed by OPM is cause to suspend payment of the supplement until the annuitant establishes to the satisfaction of OPM that he/she continues to be eligible for the supplement.

(e) The reductions described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section are not subject to the due process procedures described in 5 U.S.C. 8461(e).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2016–2024 · leading case: Bryant Semenza v. United States Postal Serv. (MSPB 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bryant Semenza v. United States Postal Serv. (MSPB 2024). · cites it 4× “5 C.F.R. § 842.505 (a); Handbook, chapter 51 § 51A3.”
Pamela A. Hewitt v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2016). “4 ¶6 Citing 5 C.F.R. § 842.505 (e), the administrative judge explained that the reduction in the appellant’s FERS annuity supplement because of her excess earnings was not subject to Board review under the due process procedures described in 5 U.”
Pamela A. Hewitt v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2016). “4 ¶6 Citing 5 C.F.R. § 842.505 (e), the administrative judge explained that the reduction in the appellant’s FERS annuity supplement because of her excess earnings was not subject to Board review under the due process procedures described in 5 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.