T-14 LRAP Overview

Discuss various money matters here. Loans (federal and private), scholarships, lottery winnings, or other school finance related information and queries.
lellie
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 9:34 pm

Re: T-14 LRAP Overview

Postby lellie » Fri Apr 28, 2017 7:00 pm

CLS' LRAP: "If examination of the required tax forms indicates possession of significant assets, further information, and an adjustment to LRAP benefits may be required "

Significant assets is so vague. Does this mean you can't buy a house for 10 years? Nebby & co: know anyone who had their contributions significantly increased due to assets acquired during repayment?

User avatar
Nebby
amateur huffpo
Posts: 30111
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: T-14 LRAP Overview

Postby Nebby » Fri Apr 28, 2017 10:08 pm

lellie wrote:CLS' LRAP: "If examination of the required tax forms indicates possession of significant assets, further information, and an adjustment to LRAP benefits may be required "

Significant assets is so vague. Does this mean you can't buy a house for 10 years? Nebby & co: know anyone who had their contributions significantly increased due to assets acquired during repayment?

I don't know anyone who had had this happen. I do not think a house would matter since you'd also have the mortgage. That provision is primarily aimed at trust fund students with significant wealth to ensure rich kids aren't getting a benefit when it's patently obvious they would not suffer financial hardship if they paid more.

lellie
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 9:34 pm

Re: T-14 LRAP Overview

Postby lellie » Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:07 pm

Nebby wrote:
lellie wrote:CLS' LRAP: "If examination of the required tax forms indicates possession of significant assets, further information, and an adjustment to LRAP benefits may be required "

Significant assets is so vague. Does this mean you can't buy a house for 10 years? Nebby & co: know anyone who had their contributions significantly increased due to assets acquired during repayment?

I don't know anyone who had had this happen. I do not think a house would matter since you'd also have the mortgage. That provision is primarily aimed at trust fund students with significant wealth to ensure rich kids aren't getting a benefit when it's patently obvious they would not suffer financial hardship if they paid more.


Makes sense- thanks!

User avatar
Anon-e-miss
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 8:05 pm

Re: T-14 LRAP Overview

Postby Anon-e-miss » Wed May 17, 2017 3:08 pm

somethingElse wrote:
TheKisSquared wrote:Can someone explain the pros/cons between straight am vs. IBR for Columbia? I'm confused as to why anyone wouldn't do IBR...

edit: assuming it's mainly the risk of negative am? anything else?


Negative amortization is by far the biggest con of the 100k cap IBR option. I suppose the other major con is that you're counting on the federal government not to change/get rid of PSLF; but it has been discussed on here (and is supported by precedents in other similar situations) that grandfathering is perhaps more likely than not. Though it's not guaranteed.

Also, negative amortization has its own 'resulting cons' if you will. Things like buying a house will be more difficult than being on the straight am option.

I personally think the way to go as far as Columbia's LRAP goes is the 'second option' of combining the straight am with IBR/PSLF. This second option is what I mentioned on the first page of this thread. Basically though, this option seems to allow you to use the straight am income cap while still being on PSLF/IBR. Columbia will write you a bigger check than what is required for IBR, and you are thus able to make bigger payments towards your loans. So you will still be making the 120 monthly payments that are required for PSLF, but you will be making bigger payments than the minimum (IBR). It seems like in this scenario, Columbia is still helping you pay down your loans and thus you avoid negative amortization. Kind of a 'best of both worlds' situation.

Also, this option allows for the ability to move over to the 100k cap if you want and still have whatever payments you had made up to that point count towards the 120. This could be useful if you land a (theoretically high paying) federal government job a few years down the line, for example. Your loans will negatively amortize at that point though, of course.

I also personally think that IBR is the way to go if you are able to land a very stable job that you know you are going to make a career out of.

Hey, sorry to necro this old post, but could you explain this a bit more? I'm definitely interested in Columbia for PI, and while the straight am component of their LRAP seems like a PI selling point over the non-YHS T14, your proposal sounds interesting as well. Although I don't think I am cogent of the specific details

User avatar
Nebby
amateur huffpo
Posts: 30111
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: T-14 LRAP Overview

Postby Nebby » Thu May 18, 2017 9:55 am

Anon-e-miss wrote:
somethingElse wrote:
TheKisSquared wrote:Can someone explain the pros/cons between straight am vs. IBR for Columbia? I'm confused as to why anyone wouldn't do IBR...

edit: assuming it's mainly the risk of negative am? anything else?


Negative amortization is by far the biggest con of the 100k cap IBR option. I suppose the other major con is that you're counting on the federal government not to change/get rid of PSLF; but it has been discussed on here (and is supported by precedents in other similar situations) that grandfathering is perhaps more likely than not. Though it's not guaranteed.

Also, negative amortization has its own 'resulting cons' if you will. Things like buying a house will be more difficult than being on the straight am option.

I personally think the way to go as far as Columbia's LRAP goes is the 'second option' of combining the straight am with IBR/PSLF. This second option is what I mentioned on the first page of this thread. Basically though, this option seems to allow you to use the straight am income cap while still being on PSLF/IBR. Columbia will write you a bigger check than what is required for IBR, and you are thus able to make bigger payments towards your loans. So you will still be making the 120 monthly payments that are required for PSLF, but you will be making bigger payments than the minimum (IBR). It seems like in this scenario, Columbia is still helping you pay down your loans and thus you avoid negative amortization. Kind of a 'best of both worlds' situation.

Also, this option allows for the ability to move over to the 100k cap if you want and still have whatever payments you had made up to that point count towards the 120. This could be useful if you land a (theoretically high paying) federal government job a few years down the line, for example. Your loans will negatively amortize at that point though, of course.

I also personally think that IBR is the way to go if you are able to land a very stable job that you know you are going to make a career out of.

Hey, sorry to necro this old post, but could you explain this a bit more? I'm definitely interested in Columbia for PI, and while the straight am component of their LRAP seems like a PI selling point over the non-YHS T14, your proposal sounds interesting as well. Although I don't think I am cogent of the specific details

What is your question? Please one at a time. LRAP is complicated and it's easiest to understand if you go one question at a time.

User avatar
Anon-e-miss
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 8:05 pm

Re: T-14 LRAP Overview

Postby Anon-e-miss » Thu May 18, 2017 1:41 pm

Nebby wrote:
Anon-e-miss wrote:
somethingElse wrote:
TheKisSquared wrote:Can someone explain the pros/cons between straight am vs. IBR for Columbia? I'm confused as to why anyone wouldn't do IBR...

edit: assuming it's mainly the risk of negative am? anything else?


Negative amortization is by far the biggest con of the 100k cap IBR option. I suppose the other major con is that you're counting on the federal government not to change/get rid of PSLF; but it has been discussed on here (and is supported by precedents in other similar situations) that grandfathering is perhaps more likely than not. Though it's not guaranteed.

Also, negative amortization has its own 'resulting cons' if you will. Things like buying a house will be more difficult than being on the straight am option.

I personally think the way to go as far as Columbia's LRAP goes is the 'second option' of combining the straight am with IBR/PSLF. This second option is what I mentioned on the first page of this thread. Basically though, this option seems to allow you to use the straight am income cap while still being on PSLF/IBR. Columbia will write you a bigger check than what is required for IBR, and you are thus able to make bigger payments towards your loans. So you will still be making the 120 monthly payments that are required for PSLF, but you will be making bigger payments than the minimum (IBR). It seems like in this scenario, Columbia is still helping you pay down your loans and thus you avoid negative amortization. Kind of a 'best of both worlds' situation.

Also, this option allows for the ability to move over to the 100k cap if you want and still have whatever payments you had made up to that point count towards the 120. This could be useful if you land a (theoretically high paying) federal government job a few years down the line, for example. Your loans will negatively amortize at that point though, of course.

I also personally think that IBR is the way to go if you are able to land a very stable job that you know you are going to make a career out of.

Hey, sorry to necro this old post, but could you explain this a bit more? I'm definitely interested in Columbia for PI, and while the straight am component of their LRAP seems like a PI selling point over the non-YHS T14, your proposal sounds interesting as well. Although I don't think I am cogent of the specific details

What is your question? Please one at a time. LRAP is complicated and it's easiest to understand if you go one question at a time.

I understand the way that Columbia's straight am LRAP and IBR LRAP work, but I don't understand the way this combined-LRAP (which seems to include features of both) works. It is mentioned in their LRAP PDF on the CLS website, but it was difficult to understand how it works in practice.
Pertaining to the post I quoted, I guess I don't understnad why the poster referred to it as "best of both worlds"

Thanks, I appreciate any light you can shed on this feature of CLS' LRAP

User avatar
Nebby
amateur huffpo
Posts: 30111
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: T-14 LRAP Overview

Postby Nebby » Thu May 18, 2017 1:47 pm

Anon-e-miss wrote:
Nebby wrote:
Anon-e-miss wrote:
somethingElse wrote:
TheKisSquared wrote:Can someone explain the pros/cons between straight am vs. IBR for Columbia? I'm confused as to why anyone wouldn't do IBR...

edit: assuming it's mainly the risk of negative am? anything else?


Negative amortization is by far the biggest con of the 100k cap IBR option. I suppose the other major con is that you're counting on the federal government not to change/get rid of PSLF; but it has been discussed on here (and is supported by precedents in other similar situations) that grandfathering is perhaps more likely than not. Though it's not guaranteed.

Also, negative amortization has its own 'resulting cons' if you will. Things like buying a house will be more difficult than being on the straight am option.

I personally think the way to go as far as Columbia's LRAP goes is the 'second option' of combining the straight am with IBR/PSLF. This second option is what I mentioned on the first page of this thread. Basically though, this option seems to allow you to use the straight am income cap while still being on PSLF/IBR. Columbia will write you a bigger check than what is required for IBR, and you are thus able to make bigger payments towards your loans. So you will still be making the 120 monthly payments that are required for PSLF, but you will be making bigger payments than the minimum (IBR). It seems like in this scenario, Columbia is still helping you pay down your loans and thus you avoid negative amortization. Kind of a 'best of both worlds' situation.

Also, this option allows for the ability to move over to the 100k cap if you want and still have whatever payments you had made up to that point count towards the 120. This could be useful if you land a (theoretically high paying) federal government job a few years down the line, for example. Your loans will negatively amortize at that point though, of course.

I also personally think that IBR is the way to go if you are able to land a very stable job that you know you are going to make a career out of.

Hey, sorry to necro this old post, but could you explain this a bit more? I'm definitely interested in Columbia for PI, and while the straight am component of their LRAP seems like a PI selling point over the non-YHS T14, your proposal sounds interesting as well. Although I don't think I am cogent of the specific details

What is your question? Please one at a time. LRAP is complicated and it's easiest to understand if you go one question at a time.

I understand the way that Columbia's straight am LRAP and IBR LRAP work, but I don't understand the way this combined-LRAP (which seems to include features of both) works. It is mentioned in their LRAP PDF on the CLS website, but it was difficult to understand how it works in practice.
Pertaining to the post I quoted, I guess I don't understnad why the poster referred to it as "best of both worlds"

Thanks, I appreciate any light you can shed on this feature of CLS' LRAP

LRAP benefit is calculated using the straight am method but you enroll in an IBR plan instead of standard repayment. It's a hybrid

User avatar
Anon-e-miss
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 8:05 pm

Re: T-14 LRAP Overview

Postby Anon-e-miss » Thu May 18, 2017 1:54 pm

Nebby wrote:
Anon-e-miss wrote:
Nebby wrote:
Anon-e-miss wrote:
somethingElse wrote:
TheKisSquared wrote:Can someone explain the pros/cons between straight am vs. IBR for Columbia? I'm confused as to why anyone wouldn't do IBR...

edit: assuming it's mainly the risk of negative am? anything else?


Negative amortization is by far the biggest con of the 100k cap IBR option. I suppose the other major con is that you're counting on the federal government not to change/get rid of PSLF; but it has been discussed on here (and is supported by precedents in other similar situations) that grandfathering is perhaps more likely than not. Though it's not guaranteed.

Also, negative amortization has its own 'resulting cons' if you will. Things like buying a house will be more difficult than being on the straight am option.

I personally think the way to go as far as Columbia's LRAP goes is the 'second option' of combining the straight am with IBR/PSLF. This second option is what I mentioned on the first page of this thread. Basically though, this option seems to allow you to use the straight am income cap while still being on PSLF/IBR. Columbia will write you a bigger check than what is required for IBR, and you are thus able to make bigger payments towards your loans. So you will still be making the 120 monthly payments that are required for PSLF, but you will be making bigger payments than the minimum (IBR). It seems like in this scenario, Columbia is still helping you pay down your loans and thus you avoid negative amortization. Kind of a 'best of both worlds' situation.

Also, this option allows for the ability to move over to the 100k cap if you want and still have whatever payments you had made up to that point count towards the 120. This could be useful if you land a (theoretically high paying) federal government job a few years down the line, for example. Your loans will negatively amortize at that point though, of course.

I also personally think that IBR is the way to go if you are able to land a very stable job that you know you are going to make a career out of.

Hey, sorry to necro this old post, but could you explain this a bit more? I'm definitely interested in Columbia for PI, and while the straight am component of their LRAP seems like a PI selling point over the non-YHS T14, your proposal sounds interesting as well. Although I don't think I am cogent of the specific details

What is your question? Please one at a time. LRAP is complicated and it's easiest to understand if you go one question at a time.

I understand the way that Columbia's straight am LRAP and IBR LRAP work, but I don't understand the way this combined-LRAP (which seems to include features of both) works. It is mentioned in their LRAP PDF on the CLS website, but it was difficult to understand how it works in practice.
Pertaining to the post I quoted, I guess I don't understnad why the poster referred to it as "best of both worlds"

Thanks, I appreciate any light you can shed on this feature of CLS' LRAP

LRAP benefit is calculated using the straight am method but you enroll in an IBR plan instead of standard repayment. It's a hybrid

So what is the benefit of the hybrid plan? It seems like you would be just as much money out of pocket as with the straight am but without the benefit of being on a 10 year repayment schedule

User avatar
Nebby
amateur huffpo
Posts: 30111
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: T-14 LRAP Overview

Postby Nebby » Thu May 18, 2017 4:41 pm

Anon-e-miss wrote:
Nebby wrote:
Anon-e-miss wrote:
Nebby wrote:
Anon-e-miss wrote:
somethingElse wrote:
TheKisSquared wrote:Can someone explain the pros/cons between straight am vs. IBR for Columbia? I'm confused as to why anyone wouldn't do IBR...

edit: assuming it's mainly the risk of negative am? anything else?


Negative amortization is by far the biggest con of the 100k cap IBR option. I suppose the other major con is that you're counting on the federal government not to change/get rid of PSLF; but it has been discussed on here (and is supported by precedents in other similar situations) that grandfathering is perhaps more likely than not. Though it's not guaranteed.

Also, negative amortization has its own 'resulting cons' if you will. Things like buying a house will be more difficult than being on the straight am option.

I personally think the way to go as far as Columbia's LRAP goes is the 'second option' of combining the straight am with IBR/PSLF. This second option is what I mentioned on the first page of this thread. Basically though, this option seems to allow you to use the straight am income cap while still being on PSLF/IBR. Columbia will write you a bigger check than what is required for IBR, and you are thus able to make bigger payments towards your loans. So you will still be making the 120 monthly payments that are required for PSLF, but you will be making bigger payments than the minimum (IBR). It seems like in this scenario, Columbia is still helping you pay down your loans and thus you avoid negative amortization. Kind of a 'best of both worlds' situation.

Also, this option allows for the ability to move over to the 100k cap if you want and still have whatever payments you had made up to that point count towards the 120. This could be useful if you land a (theoretically high paying) federal government job a few years down the line, for example. Your loans will negatively amortize at that point though, of course.

I also personally think that IBR is the way to go if you are able to land a very stable job that you know you are going to make a career out of.

Hey, sorry to necro this old post, but could you explain this a bit more? I'm definitely interested in Columbia for PI, and while the straight am component of their LRAP seems like a PI selling point over the non-YHS T14, your proposal sounds interesting as well. Although I don't think I am cogent of the specific details

What is your question? Please one at a time. LRAP is complicated and it's easiest to understand if you go one question at a time.

I understand the way that Columbia's straight am LRAP and IBR LRAP work, but I don't understand the way this combined-LRAP (which seems to include features of both) works. It is mentioned in their LRAP PDF on the CLS website, but it was difficult to understand how it works in practice.
Pertaining to the post I quoted, I guess I don't understnad why the poster referred to it as "best of both worlds"

Thanks, I appreciate any light you can shed on this feature of CLS' LRAP

LRAP benefit is calculated using the straight am method but you enroll in an IBR plan instead of standard repayment. It's a hybrid

So what is the benefit of the hybrid plan? It seems like you would be just as much money out of pocket as with the straight am but without the benefit of being on a 10 year repayment schedule

1) your benefit will still pay off in 10 years, if you have no nonlaw debt, as the benefit is based on 10 year repayment
2) if you have nonlaw debt, it will be covered since you'll be on ibr but your benefit will be greater

I'm on the hybrid because I had undergrad debt and my lrap benefit cover my entire paye obligation and it still amortizes my debt. The remainder will be forgiven with PSLF

User avatar
Anon-e-miss
Posts: 259
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 8:05 pm

Re: T-14 LRAP Overview

Postby Anon-e-miss » Thu May 18, 2017 5:16 pm

Nebby wrote:
Nebby wrote:
Anon-e-miss wrote:
Nebby wrote:
Anon-e-miss wrote:
somethingElse wrote:
TheKisSquared wrote:Can someone explain the pros/cons between straight am vs. IBR for Columbia? I'm confused as to why anyone wouldn't do IBR...

edit: assuming it's mainly the risk of negative am? anything else?


Negative amortization is by far the biggest con of the 100k cap IBR option. I suppose the other major con is that you're counting on the federal government not to change/get rid of PSLF; but it has been discussed on here (and is supported by precedents in other similar situations) that grandfathering is perhaps more likely than not. Though it's not guaranteed.

Also, negative amortization has its own 'resulting cons' if you will. Things like buying a house will be more difficult than being on the straight am option.

I personally think the way to go as far as Columbia's LRAP goes is the 'second option' of combining the straight am with IBR/PSLF. This second option is what I mentioned on the first page of this thread. Basically though, this option seems to allow you to use the straight am income cap while still being on PSLF/IBR. Columbia will write you a bigger check than what is required for IBR, and you are thus able to make bigger payments towards your loans. So you will still be making the 120 monthly payments that are required for PSLF, but you will be making bigger payments than the minimum (IBR). It seems like in this scenario, Columbia is still helping you pay down your loans and thus you avoid negative amortization. Kind of a 'best of both worlds' situation.

Also, this option allows for the ability to move over to the 100k cap if you want and still have whatever payments you had made up to that point count towards the 120. This could be useful if you land a (theoretically high paying) federal government job a few years down the line, for example. Your loans will negatively amortize at that point though, of course.

I also personally think that IBR is the way to go if you are able to land a very stable job that you know you are going to make a career out of.

Hey, sorry to necro this old post, but could you explain this a bit more? I'm definitely interested in Columbia for PI, and while the straight am component of their LRAP seems like a PI selling point over the non-YHS T14, your proposal sounds interesting as well. Although I don't think I am cogent of the specific details

What is your question? Please one at a time. LRAP is complicated and it's easiest to understand if you go one question at a time.

I understand the way that Columbia's straight am LRAP and IBR LRAP work, but I don't understand the way this combined-LRAP (which seems to include features of both) works. It is mentioned in their LRAP PDF on the CLS website, but it was difficult to understand how it works in practice.
Pertaining to the post I quoted, I guess I don't understnad why the poster referred to it as "best of both worlds"

Thanks, I appreciate any light you can shed on this feature of CLS' LRAP

LRAP benefit is calculated using the straight am method but you enroll in an IBR plan instead of standard repayment. It's a hybrid


1) your benefit will still pay off in 10 years, if you have no nonlaw debt, as the benefit is based on 10 year repayment
2) if you have nonlaw debt, it will be covered since you'll be on ibr but your benefit will be greater

I'm on the hybrid because I had undergrad debt and my lrap benefit cover my entire paye obligation and it still amortizes my debt. The remainder will be forgiven with PSLF

So is there any benefit to this program for someone who doesn't have UG debt?
The only thing I could potentially think of is that you could avoid the spousal income adjustment of the straight am LRAP by using IBR and filing taxes separately, if you have a higher earning spouse?

User avatar
Nebby
amateur huffpo
Posts: 30111
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2014 12:23 pm

Re: T-14 LRAP Overview

Postby Nebby » Thu May 18, 2017 7:29 pm

Anon-e-miss wrote:So is there any benefit to this program for someone who doesn't have UG debt?
The only thing I could potentially think of is that you could avoid the spousal income adjustment of the straight am LRAP by using IBR and filing taxes separately, if you have a higher earning spouse?

Hybrid is a little more flexible. The post you originally quoted contained the main reason one would go with hybrid over straight am if you have no undergrad debt.




Return to “Financial Aid”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest