What budgetary or legislative actions could change or delay the 2026 federal pay raise?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Congressional appropriations and presidential action are the two levers most likely to change, delay or override the White House’s 2026 pay plan: the President’s alternative plan (a 1% across‑the‑board increase with locality pay frozen and 3.8% for some law enforcement) is now before Congress and can be altered during the appropriations process or replaced by separate legislation [1] [2]. The administration typically implements the final civilian pay adjustment by executive order in December; absent that order or a change in appropriations, OPM’s implementation timetable and special‑rate tables determine effective pay dates and retroactivity [2] [3].
1. Presidential authority: executive order sets the immediate outcome
Presidents have used an “alternative” pay plan and then signed an executive order in December to set the federal pay table for the coming year; analysts note the 2026 raise will be finalized when an executive order is issued in December 2025 implementing the 2026 pay raise [2]. That means the White House can, by issuing or withholding an executive order, confirm, reduce or delay the raise’s effective terms within that implementation window [2].
2. Congressional power: appropriations and legislative overrides
Congress controls appropriations and can override or modify the President’s pay plan during passage of spending bills or through stand‑alone legislation; several sources note Congress can change the plan through the appropriations process and that lawmakers have previously altered pay outcomes [1] [4]. That route can either raise the percentage above the White House plan, enact locality changes, or—if appropriations language prevents pay increases—freeze or delay them [1] [4].
3. The Federal Employee Pay Agent and OPM technical steps matter
Even after policy decisions, the Office of Personnel Management publishes special rate tables and updates technical pay tables; OPM expected to release special rate tables by the end of 2025 with a tentative effective date of January 11, 2026 [3]. Administrative timing and the mechanics of applying locality and special rates can create de facto delays in paycheck effects even when policy has been decided [3] [2].
4. Locality pay freeze is a key lever with outsized fiscal effects
Freezing locality pay—part of the President’s alternative plan for 2026—is a policy choice that dramatically reduces the overall cost of a statutory pay correction that otherwise could have produced double‑digit locality bumps [1] [5]. Sources explain the White House proposal freezes locality pay at 2025 levels while applying a 1% across‑the‑board base raise, and Congress can accept, reject or modify that freeze [1] [5].
5. Law enforcement and special categories are bargaining chips
The White House proposal carves out larger raises (about 3.8%) for some federal law‑enforcement personnel aligned with the military pay increase; those targeted increases are politically sensitive and likely to be the subject of negotiation in Congress or administrative guidance [1] [2]. That selective approach creates precedent for Congress to demand different splits of across‑the‑board vs. targeted raises.
6. Budget messaging and the broader fiscal debate shape prospects
White House budget submissions and presidential pay messages frame the political argument; for 2026 the President signaled fiscal restraint and argued against a larger statutory formula increase that some estimates said would have produced much larger locality and base adjustments [1]. Congressional negotiators and unions are using competing fiscal narratives — cost‑control vs. recruiting/retention needs — to press for alternative outcomes [6] [1].
7. Practical routes Congress or the President could use to change or delay the raise
- Insert language in year‑end appropriations or a continuing resolution that caps, freezes, or delays pay adjustments (Congress; [1]; [3]0).
- Pass stand‑alone legislation to authorize a different percentage or restore locality increases (Congress; p1_s2).
- President could withhold or alter the executive order timing or content, delaying implementation beyond December (Executive Order practice; p1_s3).
- Administrative timing: OPM’s technical schedule for special‑rate tables and effective dates can push retroactivity or paycheck timing into January even if policy is decided earlier [3] [2].
8. What the reporting does not say or cannot confirm
Available sources discuss the President’s 1% alternative pay plan, locality freeze and the December executive‑order convention but do not provide a definitive, cited list of every statutory mechanism Congress might employ nor predict which specific appropriations riders lawmakers will attach (not found in current reporting). Sources do not list precise congressional vote counts or which committees will move particular amendments this year (not found in current reporting).
Limitations and competing perspectives are clear in the record: the administration frames its approach as fiscal discipline while unions and some lawmakers argue larger increases are needed to keep pay competitive [1] [6]. The final outcome will be determined in the interplay of the President’s December implementation, OPM’s technical releases, and what Congress writes in end‑of‑year spending bills [2] [3] [1].