The US Postal Service noted Wednesday that he wanted to raise postage rates this summer – less than a year after the last price increase for a Forever first-class stamp. The new price would increase from 58 cents to 60 cents, which the Postal Service says is less than the current rate of inflation.
The higher price of the stamp would come into effect on July 10, 11 months after itsin August, when the stamps went from 55 cents to 58 cents. This means customers would pay 9% more for postage than prices less than a year ago, above the inflation rate of 7.9% in February.
It’s not just that Americans are paying more for postage — they’re also getting less for their money, said Paul Steidler, senior fellow at the conservative-leaning Lexington Institute and Postal Service expert. The USPS has lowered its delivery standards over the past year, part of Postmaster General Louis DeJoy’s plan to put the money-losing agency back on the path to profitability.
But the postal service does not even respect its, said Steidler. “It’s one thing to have price increases, but it’s another to have absolutely abysmal service accompanying that price increase. The price increase is not in the best interests of the American people. .”
The announcement comes the same day President Biden is due to sign thein the law. This legislation will provide $107 billion in direct and indirect support to the USPS, such as allowing future retirees to enroll in Medicare and ending the requirement that the agency pre-fund health care benefits. workers for the next 75 years.
The Postal Service said the price increase will help the agency implement DeJoy’s 10-year plan, known as “Delivering for America.” plan. USPS also pointed to inflation and rising operating expenses as the reason for its rate hike.
The agency said it had proposed the rate hike to the Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC), the federal regulator that oversees the postal agency, but the PRC only issues advisory opinions. In other words, if the USPS wants to raise rates, it will go ahead regardless of the PRC’s response, Steidler noted.