What a yes vote endorsed
Federal Relocation Payment Improvement Act
What this does
The bill lets a federal agency pay a relocating employee a single lump sum instead of reimbursing individual relocation expenses. The payment is optional, and the head of the agency or a designee must authorize it. When used, the lump sum takes the place of the other relocation payments the employee would otherwise receive under the same part of federal law. Congress directs the General Services Administration to write rules for when agencies may use the lump sum, how they calculate the amount, and how an employee can dispute a denied claim and appeal to the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals. Within three years each agency must report on usage, disputes, and cost savings, and the GSA Administrator must analyze that data for two congressional committees.
Passed the House by voice vote
How we know · 6 sourced claims
- The bill lets a federal agency pay a relocating employee a single one-time lump sum instead of the individual relocation payments otherwise provided.Source: Sec. 2 (5739a(a))
- The payment is optional and must be authorized or approved by the head of the agency or a designee.Source: Sec. 2 (5739a(a))
- The lump sum is paid in lieu of any payment otherwise authorized or required under the same subchapter of title 5.Source: Sec. 2 (5739a(a))
- The General Services Administration must prescribe rules covering when agencies may authorize the lump sum, how they calculate the amount, and the process for an employee to dispute a claim and appeal to the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals.Source: Sec. 2 (5739a(b))
- Within three years of enactment each agency must report to the GSA Administrator on the number of lump-sum authorizations, employee challenges, and cost savings.Source: Sec. 2 (5739a(c)(1))
- The GSA Administrator must analyze that data and submit it to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.Source: Sec. 2 (5739a(c)(2))
Reported lobbying
At least
1
organization named this measure in a lobbying filing.
A floor, not a total. Those organizations were counted by the client name on 3 quarterly reports filed by 1 registered lobbying firm in 2025 Q4, 2026 Q1 and 2026 Q2. The disclosure form takes a free text description of the issue, so an organization that lobbied this measure without naming it is not counted here.
The filings record that lobbying was reported on the measure. They carry no per-bill dollar figure and no position, so nothing here says how much was spent or which side an organization took.
The organization named
- NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES UNION
Listed as filed. It is every client name on the filings counted here.
From the LD-2 quarterly lobbying filings published at lda.gov by the Senate Office of Public Records. Read for 2025 Q1, 2025 Q2, 2025 Q3, 2025 Q4, 2026 Q1 and 2026 Q2. The pull came up 2 short in 2025 Q4 and 7 short in 2026 Q2 against the register's own count, so those quarters are the filings posted rather than every one filed. 2026 Q3 is still inside its filing window, so that quarter is only the filings posted so far.