Federal Executive Branch
Here's a look at documents from the U.S. Executive Branch
Featured Stories
USTR: Ambassador Greer Announces U.S.-Japan Action Plan on Critical Minerals
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative issued the following news release on March 19, 2026:
* * *
Ambassador Jamieson Greer Announces U.S.-Japan Action Plan on Critical Minerals
Today, Ambassador Jamieson Greer announced the enactment of the U.S.-Japan Action Plan on Critical Minerals. Under this Action Plan, the United States and Japan will develop strategic trade policies and border mechanisms to mitigate supply chain vulnerabilities and protect the downstream industries that depend on critical minerals imports.
"The United States and Japan are taking an important
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative issued the following news release on March 19, 2026:
* * *
Ambassador Jamieson Greer Announces U.S.-Japan Action Plan on Critical Minerals
Today, Ambassador Jamieson Greer announced the enactment of the U.S.-Japan Action Plan on Critical Minerals. Under this Action Plan, the United States and Japan will develop strategic trade policies and border mechanisms to mitigate supply chain vulnerabilities and protect the downstream industries that depend on critical minerals imports.
"The United States and Japan are taking an importantstep to expand the production and diversity of critical minerals, laying the foundation for a binding plurilateral agreement supported by price floors and other measures," said Ambassador Greer. "Today's announcement reinforces our supply chain resilience and energy security with a key partner in the Indo-Pacific region. I thank my Japanese counterparts for their commitment to deepening coordination on critical minerals to further strengthen the U.S.-Japan alliance."
Read the U.S.-Japan Action Plan on Critical Minerals here (https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Press/Releases/2026/U.S.-Japan%20Critical%20Minerals%20Action%20Plan%203.19.2026.pdf).
* * *
Original text here: https://ustr.gov/about/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2026/march/ambassador-jamieson-greer-announces-us-japan-action-plan-critical-minerals
State Department Issues Public Schedule for March 20, 2026
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The U.S. Department of State issued the daily public schedule for March 20, 2026:
* * *
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO
Secretary Rubio attends meetings and briefings at the White House.
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE CHRISTOPHER LANDAU
4:30 p.m. Deputy Secretary Landau meets with Australian Ambassador to the United States Kevin Rudd and New Zealand Ambassador to the United States Chris Seed at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE FOR MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCES MICHAEL J. RIGAS
Deputy Secretary Rigas attends meetings and briefings at the Department
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The U.S. Department of State issued the daily public schedule for March 20, 2026:
* * *
SECRETARY MARCO RUBIO
Secretary Rubio attends meetings and briefings at the White House.
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE CHRISTOPHER LANDAU
4:30 p.m. Deputy Secretary Landau meets with Australian Ambassador to the United States Kevin Rudd and New Zealand Ambassador to the United States Chris Seed at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE FOR MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCES MICHAEL J. RIGAS
Deputy Secretary Rigas attends meetings and briefings at the Departmentof State.
UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS ALLISON M. HOOKER
3:00 p.m. Under Secretary Hooker meets with Dutch Ambassador to the United States Birgitta Tazelaar at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
SENIOR BUREAU OFFICIAL FOR EUROPEAN AND EURASIAN AFFAIRS BRENDAN P. HANRAHAN
11:15 a.m. Senior Bureau Official Hanrahan meets with the European Union Special Representative for the Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue Peter Sorensen at the Department of State.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)
BRIEFING SCHEDULE
No Department Press Briefing.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/2026/03/public-schedule-march-20-2026/
MSPB Issues Board Decision Involving Department of Justice Vs. John Brandon Bushkell
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The Merit Systems Protection Board issued the following case report on a board decision involving the Department of Justice and appellant John Brandon Bushkell on March 20, 2026:
* * *
BOARD DECISIONS
Appellant: John Brandon Bushkell
Agency: Department of Justice
Decision Number: 2026 MSPB 2
Docket Numbers: AT-0752-21-0619-I-2
Issuance Date: March 18, 2026
ADVERSE ACTION CHARGES
FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE
DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION, REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION
The administrative judge issued an initial decision upholding the appellant's chapter 75 removal from the agency's
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The Merit Systems Protection Board issued the following case report on a board decision involving the Department of Justice and appellant John Brandon Bushkell on March 20, 2026:
* * *
BOARD DECISIONS
Appellant: John Brandon Bushkell
Agency: Department of Justice
Decision Number: 2026 MSPB 2
Docket Numbers: AT-0752-21-0619-I-2
Issuance Date: March 18, 2026
ADVERSE ACTION CHARGES
FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE
DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION, REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION
The administrative judge issued an initial decision upholding the appellant's chapter 75 removal from the agency'sFederal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) for absence without leave (AWOL) from March 15 through May 28, 2021. The administrative judge reasoned that the agency proved its AWOL charge, the appellant did not prove his claims of disability discrimination based on his status as disabled and a denial of a reasonable accommodation, and removal was a reasonable penalty. Both parties sought review.
The Board granted the appellant's petition for review, denied the agency's cross petition for review, vacated the initial decision, and remanded the appeal for further adjudication of the appellant's claim that he was denied a reasonable accommodation.
Holding: Regardless of the form used, the appellant submitted administratively acceptable evidence covering his absence through approximately April 8, 2021.
1. The Board agreed with the administrative judge that the agency proved its AWOL charge but not all of the dates of AWOL. An agency cannot prove an AWOL charge for those portions of an absence for which the employee request to use his accrued sick leave and submits administratively acceptable evidence of his incapacity. The appellant requested to use his accrued sick leave and presented sufficient medical documentation to support his request. While the administrative judge found that the proven AWOL period began on April 2, 2021, the Board concluded that the appellant's accrued sick leave would have covered through approximately April 8, 2021. Thus, the agency proved the appellant was AWOL beginning on approximately April 9, 2021, for a period totaling over 280 hours.
2. The Board did not agree with the administrative judge to the extent that he found that the agency properly denied the appellant's request to use his accrued sick leave based on the appellant's failure to submit his supporting medical documentation, as required by the agency, on a particular agency form. An agency cannot rest an AWOL charge solely on an employee's failure to use a particular form.
Holding: The appellant's absence was not protected under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) because he did not expressly invoke the FMLA when requesting leave.
1. Because the administrative judge did not make findings on the appellant's claim that his absence was protected under the FMLA, the Board did so on review. Title II of the FMLA covers most nonPostal Federal employees, such as the appellant. The statute generally requires 30-days' advance notice of the intention to take FMLA-protected leave, and the implementing regulations issued by the Office of Personnel Management provide, at 5 C.F.R. Sec. 630.1203(b), that an employee is responsible for invoking his entitlement to FMLA leave and may not do so retroactively unless he and his personal representative are medically unable to do so.
Accordingly, the Board overruled its prior precedent that employees are not required to specifically invoke FMLA if they presented the agency with sufficient evidence to trigger consideration of their absence under FMLA. Because the appellant did not invoke FMLA when requesting his leave, the agency was not required to designate any portion of his leave as FMLA protected.
Holding: Allowing an employee to use accrued or unpaid leave is a form of reasonable accommodation.
1. In denying the appellant's claim that the agency failed to provide a reasonable accommodation for his disability, the administrative judge did not consider whether the agency denied the appellant a reasonable accommodation by failing to grant his request to use sick leave through approximately April 9, 2021. The Board vacated the initial decision and remanded this claim for further adjudication. On remand, the administrative judge was advised that he could adopt the Board's determinations that the agency proved its charge and that the penalty of removal was reasonable for the appellant's more than 280 hours of AWOL, even after considering his almost 22 years of Federal service.
* * *
COURT DECISIONS
NONPRECEDENTIAL:
Herman v. Department of Justice, No. 2024-1502 (Fed. Cir. March 16, 2026) (MSPB Docket No. DC-1221-10-0164-B-5). The court affirmed a Board decision denying corrective action in the petitioner's individual right of action appeal. The court was unpersuaded by the petitioner's argument that the law-of-the-case doctrine prevented the Board from reaching its ultimate finding that the petitioner did not prove his prima facie case of whistleblower reprisal. The court explained that the doctrine applies to issues that "have actually been decided" and that the Board's previous determination that the petitioner made nonfrivolous allegations of protected disclosures sufficient to survive dismissal was a different issue than whether he proved his prima facie case by preponderant evidence.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.mspb.gov/decisions/case_reports/Case_Report_March_20_2026.pdf
Justice Department Sues Harvard University for Antisemitism
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release in March 20, 2026:
* * *
Justice Department Sues Harvard University for Antisemitism
Today, the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division filed a lawsuit against Harvard University for race and national origin discrimination against Jewish and Israeli students, in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
After Hamas' attacks on October 7, 2023, Harvard has tolerated antisemitic mobs of students, faculty, and visitors allegedly expressing their opposition to Israel by assaulting, harassing,
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following news release in March 20, 2026:
* * *
Justice Department Sues Harvard University for Antisemitism
Today, the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division filed a lawsuit against Harvard University for race and national origin discrimination against Jewish and Israeli students, in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
After Hamas' attacks on October 7, 2023, Harvard has tolerated antisemitic mobs of students, faculty, and visitors allegedly expressing their opposition to Israel by assaulting, harassing,and intimidating Jewish and Israeli students with perceived racial, ethnic, and national connections to Israel. Harvard has been deliberately indifferent to its Jewish and Israeli students' plight and failed to prevent such conduct by selectively enforcing its campus rules to permit it to continue. Harvard ignored what its own Presidential Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias deemed the "exclusion of Israeli or Zionist students from social spaces and extracurricular activities." Harvard failed to meaningfully discipline the mobs that occupied its buildings and terrorized its Jewish and Israeli students. Federal law prohibits discrimination based on race, color, or national origin in schools that accept federal funding.
"Since October 7th, 2023, too many of our educational institutions have allowed anti-Semitism to flourish on campus - Harvard included," said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. "Today's litigation underscores the Trump Administration's commitment to demanding better from our nation's schools and putting an end to discriminatory behavior that harms students."
"Every student deserves to learn without fear of harassment or exclusion," said Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. "When institutions take taxpayer dollars, they accept a duty to protect civil rights. We hold Harvard accountable on the principle that antisemitism has no place in any program funded by the American people."
"This Department of Justice will not tolerate the harassment, assault, or intimidation of Jewish and Israeli students, and neither should Harvard," said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. "This Justice Department has no tolerance for such brazen violations of federal law."
"When OCR notified Harvard of the Title VI violation, we recognized Harvard's public commitment to address antisemitism, but found its proposed reforms did not meet Title VI requirements," said Paula M. Stannard, Director of the Department of Human Services' Office for Civil Rights (OCR). "OCR required concrete action, not assurances. We commend the U.S. Department of Justice for pursuing this case."
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, alleges that Harvard has failed to protect its Jewish and Israeli students in two ways. First, Harvard has continued to be deliberately indifferent to a level of hostility on its campus so well-known across the nation that members of Congress were writing about it. Second, Harvard has refused to enforce its campus rules against students who harass their Jewish and Israeli peers.
Harvard is currently set to receive more than $2.6 billion of taxpayer money under active grants from the Department of Health and Human Services, to say nothing of other federal agencies. The United States' complaint seeks to compel Harvard to comply with Title VI, and to recover the taxpayer funds that Harvard accepted while in violation of Title VI.
This case is brought by the Educational Opportunities Section of the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division.
You can view the complaint here (https://www.justice.gov/crt/media/1432096/dl).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-harvard-university-antisemitism
FEC Issues Digest for Week of March 16-20, 2026
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The Federal Election Commission issued the following weekly digest:
* * *
Commission meetings and hearings
No open meetings or executive sessions were scheduled this week.
* * *
Website Initiatives
The Commission recently launched a new rulemaking search system on the FEC's website. The new system provides fast, comprehensive access to FEC rulemaking documents and is easily accessible via mobile devices. Users can search rulemaking documents by regulation number, document type, date, and more. Advanced search capabilities include keyword and Boolean options and proximity
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The Federal Election Commission issued the following weekly digest:
* * *
Commission meetings and hearings
No open meetings or executive sessions were scheduled this week.
* * *
Website Initiatives
The Commission recently launched a new rulemaking search system on the FEC's website. The new system provides fast, comprehensive access to FEC rulemaking documents and is easily accessible via mobile devices. Users can search rulemaking documents by regulation number, document type, date, and more. Advanced search capabilities include keyword and Boolean options and proximityfilters that allow users to search for terms or phrases that appear within a set distance from one another. More information about the FEC's legal search system capabilities is available in the FEC's Legal Research Guide.
* * *
Regulations and agency procedures
FEC Form 99 Update: The Commission has recently implemented new attachment functionality for electronic filers submitting an FEC Form 99 webform (Miscellaneous Electronic Submission to the FEC), which will now allow committees to upload PDF documents as part of their submissions. As a result, committees may now file Schedule C-1s (Loans and Lines of Credit from Lending Institutions), copies of loan agreements, loan forgiveness statements, and Form 8s (Debt Settlement Plans) electronically as attachments with electronic signatures, including required third-party signatures. Prior to this new functionality, filers had to file documents with third-party signatures on paper. Filers should properly categorize the Form 99 from the list of options provided.
* * *
Public Disclosure
On March 17, the Office of the Inspector General made public a Modified Peer Review Report.
* * *
Outreach
On March 18, the Commission hosted a webinar for Nonconnected PACs.
* * *
Reports Due in 2026
The Commission has posted the 2026 Congressional Pre-Election Reporting Dates. Reporting schedules for all filers in 2026 are also available.
* * *
Election Dates
The Commission has posted a list of 2026 Congressional Primary Dates.
* * *
Employment opportunities
The Commission is accepting applications for the position of IT Specialist (INFOSEC/CUSTSPT) in the Operations Division, Office of the Chief Information Officer, through March 24, 2026.
* * *
Upcoming educational opportunities
March 25, 2026: The Commission is scheduled to host a FECFile webinar for PACs and party committees.
April 1, 2026: The Commission is scheduled to host a FECFile webinar for candidate committees.
April 21-22, 2026: The Commission is scheduled to host a webinar for corporations and their PACs.
For more information on upcoming training opportunities, see the Commission's Trainings page.
* * *
Upcoming reporting due dates
March 20: March Monthly Reports are due. For more information, see the 2026 Monthly Reporting schedule.
The Commission has posted filing information regarding the Georgia 14th District Special Runoff Election, scheduled for April 7, 2026.
The Commission has posted filing information regarding the New Jersey 11th District Special General Election, scheduled for April 16, 2026.
The Commission has posted filing information regarding the California 1st District Special General Election, scheduled for June 2, 2026, and Special Runoff Election (if necessary), scheduled for August 4, 2026.
* * *
Additional research materials
Contribution Limits: In addition to the current limits, the Commission has posted an archive of contribution limits that were in effect going back to the 1975-1976 election cycles.
Federal election results are available. The data was compiled from the official vote totals published by state election offices.
FEC Notify: Want to be notified by email when campaign finance reports are received by the agency? Sign up here.
The Combined Federal State Disclosure and Election Directory is available. This publication identifies the federal and state agencies responsible for the disclosure of campaign finances, lobbying, personal finances, public financing, candidates on the ballot, election results, spending on state initiatives, and other financial filings.
The Presidential Election Campaign Fund Tax Checkoff Chart provides information on balance of the Fund, monthly deposits into the Fund reported by the Department of the Treasury, payments from the Fund as certified by the FEC, and participation rates of taxpayers as reported by the Internal Revenue Service. For more information on the Presidential Public Funding Program, see the Public Funding of Presidential Elections page.
The FEC Record is available as a continuously updated online news source.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fec.gov/updates/week-of-march-16-20-2026/
FCC Enforcement Bureau Requests Information on Status of Private-Led Traceback Efforts of Suspected Unlawful Robocalls
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Enforcement Bureau issued the following public notice (EB Docket No. 20-195) on March 20, 2026:
* * *
The Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act (TRACED Act) was signed into law on December 30, 2019./1 Congress required the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) to issue a public notice annually to seek comment on private-led efforts to trace back the source of suspected unlawful robocalls and to issue an annual report on the status of such efforts and the participation of voice service
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, March 21 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Enforcement Bureau issued the following public notice (EB Docket No. 20-195) on March 20, 2026:
* * *
The Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act (TRACED Act) was signed into law on December 30, 2019./1 Congress required the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) to issue a public notice annually to seek comment on private-led efforts to trace back the source of suspected unlawful robocalls and to issue an annual report on the status of such efforts and the participation of voice serviceproviders in such efforts./2 The Enforcement Bureau (Bureau) requests voice service providers and the registered consortium, USTelecom - The Broadband Association's Industry Traceback Group (Traceback Group), to submit information concerning private-led efforts to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls necessary for the Commission's annual report.
The reporting period for this request is from January 1, 2025, to December 31, 2025. Submissions are due by May 1, 2026.
Background. Unlawful robocalls plague the American public. In many instances, unlawful robocalls include inaccurate or misleading caller identification information, known as spoofed caller ID. Spoofed caller ID makes it more difficult to identify the source of the call. In order to enforce the laws prohibiting illegal robocalls, government and industry work together to trace suspected unlawful robocalls to their origination--a process known as "traceback." Congress acknowledged the beneficial collaboration between the Commission and the private sector on traceback issues and, in section 13(d) of the TRACED Act, required the Commission to establish a registration process for the registration of a single consortium to conduct private-led traceback efforts and to issue an annual notice seeking registrations. On July 27, 2020, the Bureau selected the Traceback Group as the registered consortium to conduct private-led traceback efforts, and it has reselected the Traceback Group on multiple occasions since./3 The Traceback Group continues to serve as the registered consortium until the Commission selects another entity./4 Section 13(c) of the TRACED Act requires the Commission to seek additional information annually from voice service providers and the registered consortium about the status of private-led traceback efforts and the participation of voice service providers in such efforts./5 Section 13(a) of the TRACED Act requires the Commission to publish an annual report on the status of those efforts./6 Congress mandated that the registered consortium selected to conduct private-led tracebacks and any voice service provider be given an opportunity to provide information to the Commission to be used in the annual report./7 At a minimum, the report must include the following information:/8
1. A description of private-led efforts to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls by the registered consortium and the actions taken by the registered consortium to coordinate with the Commission;
2. A list of voice service providers identified by the registered consortium that participated in private-led efforts to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls through the registered consortium;
3. A list of each voice service provider that received a request from the registered consortium to participate in private-led efforts to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls and refused to participate, as identified by the registered consortium;
4. The reason, if any, each voice service provider identified by the registered consortium provided for not participating in private-led efforts to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls; and
5. A description of how the Commission may use the information provided to the Commission by voice service providers or the registered consortium that have participated in private-led efforts to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful robocalls in the enforcement efforts by the Commission.
Submission Process: Information may be filed via ECFS (www.fcc.gov/ecfs) in EB Docket No. 20-195. If filers wish to include confidential information as part of their submitted information, they must submit: (1) a redacted, public version via ECFS; and (2) a non-redacted, confidential version electronically to the Enforcement Bureau. Filers should contact Genesis Monserrate, Attorney Advisor, Telecommunications Consumers Division, Enforcement Bureau by phone at 202-418-1334 or e-mail at genesis.monserrate@fcc.gov to arrange electronic submission of the non-redacted version. The confidential material must be marked with specificity and requests for confidential treatment also must conform to the other requirements of section 0.459 of the Commission's rules./9
Parties may choose to file by paper; such filers must file an original and one copy of each filing. Filings can be sent by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701. U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 45 L Street, NE Washington, DC 20554.
Deadline to Submit Information: May 1, 2026.
People with Disabilities. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice) or 202-418-0432 (TTY).
Additional Information. For further information, contact Genesis Monserrate, Attorney Advisor, Telecommunications Consumers Division, Enforcement Bureau by phone (at 202-418-1334) or e-mail (genesis.monserrate@fcc.gov).
* * *
Footnotes:
1/ Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act, Pub. L. No. 116-105, 133 Stat. 3274 (2019) (TRACED Act).
2/ Id. Sec. 13(a), (c).
3/ See Implementing Section 13(d) of the Pallone-Thune Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence Act (TRACED Act), EB Docket No. 20-22, Report and Order, 38 FCC Rcd 7561, 7561-62, 637563, paras. 1, 5 (EB 2023).
4/ See 47 CFR Sec. 64.1203(d) ("The current registered consortium shall continue its traceback efforts until the effective date of the selection of any new registered consortium."),
5/ TRACED Act Sec. 13(c).
6/ Id. Sec. 13(a)
7/ Id. Sec. 13(c).
8/ Id. Sec. 13(b).
9/ 47 CFR Sec. 0.459.
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-257A1.pdf
BLS Southwest Region Issues Report on Employer Costs for Employee Compensation for the Regions December 2025
DALLAS, Texas, March 21 (TNSLrpt) -- Employer Costs for Employee Compensation for the Regions December 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Southwest Region - March 20, 2026
* * *
Private industry employer costs for employee compensation among the four regions of the country ranged from $41.21 per hour in the South to $53.99 in the Northeast in December 2025, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. In the other two regions, hourly employer costs for employee compensation stood at $43.26 in the Midwest and $50.85 in the West. (See chart 1.) In addition
... Show Full Article
DALLAS, Texas, March 21 (TNSLrpt) -- Employer Costs for Employee Compensation for the Regions December 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Southwest Region - March 20, 2026
* * *
Private industry employer costs for employee compensation among the four regions of the country ranged from $41.21 per hour in the South to $53.99 in the Northeast in December 2025, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. In the other two regions, hourly employer costs for employee compensation stood at $43.26 in the Midwest and $50.85 in the West. (See chart 1.) In additionto regional estimates, employer costs for nine smaller geographic divisions are also available. Within divisions, total compensation costs ranged from $36.70 per hour in the East South Central division to $54.56 in the Pacific division. (See table 1.) Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC) are based on the National Compensation Survey, which measures employer costs for wages, salaries, and employee benefits. (Geographic definitions of the regions and divisions follow in the Technical Note.)
* * *
Chart 1. Employer costs per employee hour worked by region, private industry, December 2025
* * *
In the Northeast, hourly total compensation costs in December 2025 were comprised of the following: wages and salaries ($37.09) made up 68.7 percent, while total benefits ($16.90) accounted for the remaining 31.3 percent of compensation costs. Paid leave, which includes vacation, holiday, sick, and personal leave, averaged $4.59 per hour worked, or 8.5 percent of all compensation costs. Costs for insurance, which include life, health, and short- and long-term disability, averaged $4.55 per hour worked, accounting for 8.4 percent of total compensation costs. Legally required benefits, which include Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance (both state and federal), and workers' compensation, averaged $3.87 per hour and represented 7.2 percent of total compensation costs.
In the West, hourly wages and salaries averaged $35.56 and accounted for 69.9 percent of all compensation costs. Total benefits averaged $15.29, or 30.1 percent of compensation costs. Paid leave averaged $3.93 per hour, or 7.7 percent of compensation costs. Legally required benefits costs were $3.85 per hour, or 7.6 percent of regional compensation costs. Insurance costs averaged $3.51 per hour, accounting for 6.9 percent of total compensation costs in the West.
The Midwest region recorded an hourly wage and salary average of $29.99 in December 2025, representing 69.3 percent of all compensation costs. Total benefits averaged $13.26 and accounted for the remaining 30.7 percent of total compensation costs. The three highest major categories for employer benefits were insurance benefits ($3.56 per hour worked), representing 8.2 percent, as well as legally required benefits ($3.13) and paid leave ($3.10), both representing 7.2 percent of total employer compensation costs in the Midwest.
In the South, wages and salaries averaged $29.54 per hour and comprised 71.7 percent of total employer compensation costs, while benefits, at $11.67 per hour, accounted for the remaining 28.3 percent. Paid leave averaged $3.00 per hour worked, followed by insurance benefits costs at $2.97 per hour; these categories accounted for 7.3 percent and 7.2 percent, respectively, of total compensation costs in the South. Legally required benefits were the third-highest benefit cost and averaged $2.89 per hour, accounting for 7.0 percent of employer compensation for the region.
Overall, compensation costs among private industry employers in the United States averaged $46.15 per hour worked in December 2025. Wages and salaries, at $32.36 per hour, accounted for 70.1 percent of these costs, while benefits, at $13.79, made up the remaining 29.9 percent.
* * *
The March 2026 national release on Employer Costs for Employee Compensation is scheduled to be released on Friday, June 12, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. (CT).
* * *
Technical Note
Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC) provides the average employer cost for wages and salaries as well as benefits per employee hour worked.
Employer Costs for Employee Compensation data in this release cover private industry. Excluded from private industry are the self-employed, agricultural workers, and private household workers. Data for this reference period were collected from a probability sample of approximately 28,700 occupational observations selected from a sample of about 6,700 private industry establishments. The private industry sample is rotated over approximately three years, which makes the sample more representative of the economy and reduces respondent burden. Data are collected for the pay period including the 12th day of the survey months of March, June, September, and December.
Employer Costs for Employee Compensation data on total compensation, wages and salaries, and benefits in private industry are produced annually in the March reference period for 15 combined and metropolitan statistical areas (CSA and MSA). Further information about metropolitan area ECEC estimates is available at www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/cwc/bls-introduces-new-employer-costs-for-employee-compensation-data-for-private-industry-workers-in-15-metropolitan-areas.pdf.
For detailed information on ECEC, see "National Compensation Measures," of the BLS Handbook of Methods at www.bls.gov/opub/hom/ncs/home.htm. Current and historical BLS data are also available online at www.bls.gov/ecec.
Information in this release will be made available to individuals with sensory impairments upon request. Voice phone: (202) 691-5200; Telecommunications Relay Service: 7-1-1.
Regional definitions
Northeast region
* New England division: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont
* Middle Atlantic division: New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania
Midwest region
* East North Central division: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin
* West North Central division: Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota
South region
* South Atlantic division: Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia
* East South Central division: Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee
* West South Central division: Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas
West region
* Mountain division: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming
* Pacific division: Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington
* * *
Table 1. Employer Costs for Employee Compensation for private industry workers by census region and division [December 2025]
* * *
View original text plus charts and tables here: https://www.bls.gov/regions/southwest/news-release/2026/employercostsforemployeecompensation_regions_20260320.htm
