The United States Postal Service (USPS) may be going corporate. In recent years, USPS has faced scrutiny for its significant, multi-billion-dollar losses since 2007, leaving policymakers with the question of how to correct these issues. The idea of privatization has gained more popularity in recent years, especially in the Trump administration, even going as far as to draft a 70-page privatization proposal in 2018 that was ultimately rejected due to congressional resistance. Now that he has returned to office, the likelihood of privatization has returned with him. Of course, it’s less than ideal for USPS to incur such losses each year. Still, privatization does not guarantee profitability or efficiency, if anything, it is a risk that threatens mail accessibility, especially in unprofitable rural or remote delivery areas.

Unlike private companies, USPS is required by law to deliver to all 169 million addresses across the U.S. for 6 days of the week. This includes the most remote homes from the bottom of the Grand Canyon to the Alaskan Tundra. This universal service mandate ensures that all Americans have equal access to vital deliveries such as medications, government documents, and mail-in ballots. However, a fully privatized model under the Trump Administration offers no clear mechanism for funding this essential, but unprofitable service. A core argument for privatization is to avoid tapping into taxpayer dollars. Currently, USPS is self-funded; however, without any alternative subsidy model for its universal service obligations, privatization runs the risk of having to cut unprofitable routes to become profitable. As economist Nathan Barker at UChicago explained to me in an interview, public services should remain public “when there’s some benefit of a service existing beyond just financial transactions—for example, if we think it’s fundamentally important that people can vote more readily or access medication by way of mail, that’s not purely incorporated in the price… there’s a reason to do so.” In other words, the value of USPS lies not only in what it delivers but in who it delivers to, and privatization risks leaving those people behind.

Another issue that may arise with the privatization of USPS is costlier and less efficient services. Most would assume that with the goal of privatization being profitability, a privately run USPS would cut unprofitable routes passing alleviating costs from the consumer while increasing its ability to innovate without congressional oversight which would make services better. Surprisingly, this is often not the case as shown in privatized postal services worldwide. In Europe, countries that privatized their postal systems exhibited steeper price increases between 2012 and 2021 than countries that kept their services public. The London Royal Mail, specifically, saw an increase in stamp prices six times within three years. Rural and remote areas would likely experience these effects disproportionately as they rely on USPS deliveries for essential services like bills, groceries, and medications when pharmacies may be miles down the road. Current private couriers such as UPS and FedEx offer some limited services to remote and rural areas and it is at a rather steep cost. Surcharges to deliver outside a few miles outside of densely populated areas range from a $4-6 charge. Prices in remote areas charge approximately $15 and truly disconnected areas like Alaska pay $43 in additional delivery fees. In comparison, USPS charges no additional costs to deliver to any of the listed areas. Beyond letters, USPS offers flat-rate boxes for parcels, allowing customers to ship packages anywhere in the U.S. for a predetermined price, regardless of distance or delivery zone. This service provides accessible and reliable options for sending items without incurring high surcharges for more remote locations. In addition to costlier services, European countries have also noticed a decline in the reliability of their mail services. In 2023, the Royal Mail delivered 74.7% of its First-Class mail on time, falling short of its target for 93% timeliness. The National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) seems especially weary of this possibility, believing that USPS may truly be on the same trajectory as the Royal Mail. Melissa Rakestraw, the executive vice president of the NALC, stated that “we can expect the same here” if USPS is privatized.

The threat of privatization facing USPS is looming and it is pertinent that those most affected understand the potential dangers these changes may bring. However, recognizing the value USPS brings to communities, particularly rural and underserved populations, empowers citizens and policymakers to push for reforms that strengthen USPS rather than dismantle it. As USPS continues to be a lifeline for millions, ensuring that essential communication and goods remain accessible regardless of location is necessary.