Connect with us

Facts Checked Reports

Public Sector’s Wage Bill at End of President Sirleaf Administration was Not US$320 Million

Monrovia – Vocal Liberian Economist Samuel Jackson claims that the administration of former President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf left the public sector wage bill at US$320 million.

Fact Check Report By: Varney Kelvin Sirleaf | LVL Fact Checker

Mr. Jackson made the claim when he recently appeared on the a live radio interview on OK FM  to debate with opposition Unity Party Secretary General Amos Twea about the state of the economy under the recent past and present administration.

Local Voices Liberia Fact Checking Desk has verified the claim by first reviewing the National Budget for Fiscal Year 2017/2018 – which was the last national budget of the Sirleaf administration.

In the approved National Budget for Fiscal Year 2017-2018, the total allocation for compensation of employees made in that year was at US$ 298.020 million –  an amount which is less than the US$320 million.


Based on review of the budgetary allotments made in the National Budget for Fiscal Year 2017-2018, the public sector wage bill in that budget year was at US$ 298,020 million and not US$320 million as claimed by Mr. Samuel Jackson.

Therefore, we conclude that the claim made by Economist Samuel Jackson that the public sector wage bill at the end of the Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf administration was at US$320 million is incorrect.

You may contact us to fact check any claim or information relative to Liberia. Contact us or  WhatsApp: +231880986778

Local Voices Liberia is a network of dedicated Liberian journalists based in the 15 counties working to lift the development concerns and progress of rural communities.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



The claim is rigorous and the content is demonstrably true.

Half True

The statement is correct, although it needs clarification additional information or context.


Evidence publicly available neither proves nor disproves the claim. More research is needed.


The statement contains correct data, but ignores very important elements or is mixed with incorrect data giving a different, inaccurate or false impression.


The claim is inaccurate according to the best evidence publicly available at this time.


Upon further investigation of the claim, a different conclusion was determined leading to the removal of the initial determination.


A rude, disrespectful, or unreasonable comment that is somewhat likely to make you leave a discussion or give up on sharing your perspective. Based on algorithmic detection of issues around toxicity, obscenity, threats, insults, and hate speech;

More in Facts Checked Reports