PSLF revisions: New budget proposal screws anyone in PI. Forum

[patogordo]

assuming both proposals pass -- PSLF cap and PAYE tax-free forgiveness -- why do you have to wait 25 years for PSLF and only 20 years for PAYE? or are they changing PAYE back to 25 years?

[Tiago Splitter]

assuming both proposals pass -- PSLF cap and PAYE tax-free forgiveness -- why do you have to wait 25 years for PSLF and only 20 years for PAYE? or are they changing PAYE back to 25 years?

Only reason I can think of is that in exchange for the ten year haircut you have to go an extra five on the back end. More likely every new borrower post-2015 will be on a 25 year plan.

[desiballa21]

From the responses in this thread, seems like it won't affect borrowers that are already in repayment, right? 1L here, hoping it won't pass ever but if it does, after 2016 please.

[Dingo Starr]

assuming both proposals pass -- PSLF cap and PAYE tax-free forgiveness -- why do you have to wait 25 years for PSLF and only 20 years for PAYE? or are they changing PAYE back to 25 years?

I believe it said all new PAYE users would be on a 25 year plan.
PSLF timeframe would not change for those affected, just the amount forgiven at the 10 year mark.
Theoretically, this could mean that 57,500 goes away at 10 years public service and the remainder would disappear after another 15 of PAYE.

[Tiago Splitter]

From the responses in this thread, seems like it won't affect borrowers that are already in repayment, right? 1L here, hoping it won't pass ever but if it does, after 2016 please.

Seems like it. From the link bouakedojo posted on the last page:

"For all new borrowers (with minor exceptions) starting with the 2015-2016 academic year the new expanded PAYE program will be the only income-based repayment plan available so the cap applies. For any other existing borrowers they retain the income-based repayment plan in their promissory note but if they choose to switch to the new expanded PAYE program, they have to accept all the conditions including the caps."

[dresden doll]

Retroactivity would have been pretty unprecedented, so I'm not surprised that they're taking this position.

My good deed for the day: warning the PI-minded 0Ls I know IRL that this may be a thing.

[dresden doll]

I generally just can't imagine giving zero fucks about my debt load, with or without the cap.

I'm really good at denial and work pretty hard at ignoring it, so it doesn't keep me up at night or anything - but I still want to get the hell rid of it before 25 years.

I actually do sometimes stay up at night over it. Ugh.

[patogordo]

From the responses in this thread, seems like it won't affect borrowers that are already in repayment, right? 1L here, hoping it won't pass ever but if it does, after 2016 please.

Seems like it. From the link bouakedojo posted on the last page:

"For all new borrowers (with minor exceptions) starting with the 2015-2016 academic year the new expanded PAYE program will be the only income-based repayment plan available so the cap applies. For any other existing borrowers they retain the income-based repayment plan in their promissory note but if they choose to switch to the new expanded PAYE program, they have to accept all the conditions including the caps."

this page (http://educatedrisk.org/node/106) suggests that any new borrower post-2015 w/ >$57500 debt would be on 25-year repayment, instead of 20-year. that seems crazy and confusing to me.

[Nomo]

From the responses in this thread, seems like it won't affect borrowers that are already in repayment, right? 1L here, hoping it won't pass ever but if it does, after 2016 please.

Seems like it. From the link bouakedojo posted on the last page:

"For all new borrowers (with minor exceptions) starting with the 2015-2016 academic year the new expanded PAYE program will be the only income-based repayment plan available so the cap applies. For any other existing borrowers they retain the income-based repayment plan in their promissory note but if they choose to switch to the new expanded PAYE program, they have to accept all the conditions including the caps."

My email to the Department of Education was routed to the Research and Customer Care Center. They said they have not released any specifics and have no information to provide. Not saying the people at "Educated Risk" (bouakedojo's link) are making stuff up. But, it does make me think Dep. of Ed. has no idea what its really doing. I don't think those of us who have already graduated are really in the clear with this proposal yet.

Thank you for contacting the U.S. Department of Education’s – Research and Customer Care Center (RCCC). We appreciate you taking the time to contact us.

In regards to your inquiry, the Department has not released any specifics to items discussed in the President’s 2015 Budget. When information is available, updates will be provided on IFAP or through other means. At this time, we do not have any information to share at the present time.

If I can be of any further assistance on this subject, please feel free to contact me. However, if you have any new inquiries on other topics, please feel free to contact us at fsa.customer.support@ed.gov, or directly at 1-800-433-7327. Thank you again for contacting the U.S. Department of Education’s – Research and Customer Care Center.

Thank you,
Mr. M. DeCosta
Supervisor
Research and Customer Care Center (RCCC)
Call Center Oversight Branch
Tel: 800-433-7327

[andythefir]

From the responses in this thread, seems like it won't affect borrowers that are already in repayment, right? 1L here, hoping it won't pass ever but if it does, after 2016 please.

Seems like it. From the link bouakedojo posted on the last page:

"For all new borrowers (with minor exceptions) starting with the 2015-2016 academic year the new expanded PAYE program will be the only income-based repayment plan available so the cap applies. For any other existing borrowers they retain the income-based repayment plan in their promissory note but if they choose to switch to the new expanded PAYE program, they have to accept all the conditions including the caps."

I'm sorry if I'm missing something obvious (should have taken tax/accounting instead of all those con law classes), but does retaining the "income-based repayment plan in their promissory note" include only PAYE or PSLF in addition? I would much rather have IBR + PSLF then PAYE w/out PSLF.

[desiballa21]

From the responses in this thread, seems like it won't affect borrowers that are already in repayment, right? 1L here, hoping it won't pass ever but if it does, after 2016 please.

Seems like it. From the link bouakedojo posted on the last page:

"For all new borrowers (with minor exceptions) starting with the 2015-2016 academic year the new expanded PAYE program will be the only income-based repayment plan available so the cap applies. For any other existing borrowers they retain the income-based repayment plan in their promissory note but if they choose to switch to the new expanded PAYE program, they have to accept all the conditions including the caps."

this page (http://educatedrisk.org/node/106) suggests that any new borrower post-2015 w/ >$57500 debt would be on 25-year repayment, instead of 20-year. that seems crazy and confusing to me.

that's any borrowers post-2015 ONLY if it passes, yes? So if it passes next year, it'd be any borrower post-2016, then if it doesn't pass for 2 years post-2017, right?

[patogordo]

From the responses in this thread, seems like it won't affect borrowers that are already in repayment, right? 1L here, hoping it won't pass ever but if it does, after 2016 please.

Seems like it. From the link bouakedojo posted on the last page:

"For all new borrowers (with minor exceptions) starting with the 2015-2016 academic year the new expanded PAYE program will be the only income-based repayment plan available so the cap applies. For any other existing borrowers they retain the income-based repayment plan in their promissory note but if they choose to switch to the new expanded PAYE program, they have to accept all the conditions including the caps."

this page (http://educatedrisk.org/node/106) suggests that any new borrower post-2015 w/ >$57500 debt would be on 25-year repayment, instead of 20-year. that seems crazy and confusing to me.

that's any borrowers post-2015 ONLY if it passes, yes? So if it passes next year, it'd be any borrower post-2016, then if it doesn't pass for 2 years post-2017, right?

well w/e i just meant to distinguish post-changes borrowers from existing borrowers.

[hdunlop]

At this time, we do not have any information to share at the present time.

lols

[Tiago Splitter]

that's any borrowers post-2015 ONLY if it passes, yes? So if it passes next year, it'd be any borrower post-2016, then if it doesn't pass for 2 years post-2017, right?

That seems reasonable but the proposal doesn't say "for new borrowers starting one full year after passage of the law" or anything like that. I think right now the group of 0L's starting in the fall is the last safe class, to the extent anyone is safe.

I'm sorry if I'm missing something obvious (should have taken tax/accounting instead of all those con law classes), but does retaining the "income-based repayment plan in their promissory note" include only PAYE or PSLF in addition? I would much rather have IBR + PSLF then PAYE w/out PSLF.

All of the promissory notes right now include language about PSLF, and the Department's statement indicates that current version of PSLF will be honored for anyone with that in their promissory note. The tricky part is really just for borrowers who had balances before 2007; They will be eligible for the new PAYE going forward, but if they switch they'll be subject to the forgiveness cap.

[Dingo Starr]

provided on IFAP...
Mr. M. DeCosta
Supervisor
Research and Customer Care Center (RCCC)
Call Center Oversight Branch
Tel: 800-433-7327[/size]

Yes you do, sir, especially with an answer like this.

[Nomo]

From the responses in this thread, seems like it won't affect borrowers that are already in repayment, right? 1L here, hoping it won't pass ever but if it does, after 2016 please.

Seems like it. From the link bouakedojo posted on the last page:

"For all new borrowers (with minor exceptions) starting with the 2015-2016 academic year the new expanded PAYE program will be the only income-based repayment plan available so the cap applies. For any other existing borrowers they retain the income-based repayment plan in their promissory note but if they choose to switch to the new expanded PAYE program, they have to accept all the conditions including the caps."

My email to the Department of Education was routed to the Research and Customer Care Center. They said they have not released any specifics and have no information to provide. Not saying the people at "Educated Risk" (bouakedojo's link) are making stuff up. But, it does make me think Dep. of Ed. has no idea what its really doing. I don't think those of us who have already graduated are really in the clear with this proposal yet.

Thank you for contacting the U.S. Department of Education’s – Research and Customer Care Center (RCCC). We appreciate you taking the time to contact us.

In regards to your inquiry, the Department has not released any specifics to items discussed in the President’s 2015 Budget. When information is available, updates will be provided on IFAP or through other means. At this time, we do not have any information to share at the present time.

If I can be of any further assistance on this subject, please feel free to contact me. However, if you have any new inquiries on other topics, please feel free to contact us at fsa.customer.support@ed.gov, or directly at 1-800-433-7327. Thank you again for contacting the U.S. Department of Education’s – Research and Customer Care Center.

Thank you,
Mr. M. DeCosta
Supervisor
Research and Customer Care Center (RCCC)
Call Center Oversight Branch
Tel: 800-433-7327

As a followup I asked about the Educated Risk website and whether there was any legitimacy its reported responses from Dep. of Education. I got this in return:

Thank you for your response on this matter. I will review the link you have provided. However, nothing has been provided from our Policy Liaison Team concerning anything from the budget proposal. Once items have been fully reviewed, discussed, and discussed again, more information will be provided. At present, they have not forward any information at this time.

Thank you,
Mr. M. DeCosta
Supervisor
Research and Customer Care Center (RCCC)
Call Center Oversight Branch
Tel: 800-433-7327

[bouakedojo]

From the responses in this thread, seems like it won't affect borrowers that are already in repayment, right? 1L here, hoping it won't pass ever but if it does, after 2016 please.

Seems like it. From the link bouakedojo posted on the last page:

"For all new borrowers (with minor exceptions) starting with the 2015-2016 academic year the new expanded PAYE program will be the only income-based repayment plan available so the cap applies. For any other existing borrowers they retain the income-based repayment plan in their promissory note but if they choose to switch to the new expanded PAYE program, they have to accept all the conditions including the caps."

this page (http://educatedrisk.org/node/106) suggests that any new borrower post-2015 w/ >$57500 debt would be on 25-year repayment, instead of 20-year. that seems crazy and confusing to me.

I think this was written pre-response from DoE, though.

[dresden doll]

When you think about it, we're freaking out over the specifics of an item on a wishlist that is so certain to be DOA that DOE hasn't even bothered thinking through much of anything.

Not that any of this is NBD, but really, can it be more obvious that they didn't even bother fleshing out details b/c they know the budget as a whole is going nowhere?

[bouakedojo]

When you think about it, we're freaking out over the specifics of an item on a wishlist that is so certain to be DOA that DOE hasn't even bothered thinking through much of anything.

Not that any of this is NBD, but really, can it be more obvious that they didn't even bother fleshing out details b/c they know the budget as a whole is going nowhere?

To an extent, I agree. But I'm also worried about mid-terms and the signaling from this administration of what they are willing to compromise on.

[Nomo]

When you think about it, we're freaking out over the specifics of an item on a wishlist that is so certain to be DOA that DOE hasn't even bothered thinking through much of anything.

Not that any of this is NBD, but really, can it be more obvious that they didn't even bother fleshing out details b/c they know the budget as a whole is going nowhere?

To an extent, I agree. But I'm also worried about mid-terms and the signaling from this administration of what they are willing to compromise on.

Very concerned that the administration is willing to compromise on this. I think its important that we let them know how we feel. Particularly in regard to retroactive modification. The higher ed lobby might push hard on keeping certain aspects of IBR/PSLF, but preventing retroactive modification probably isn't a plausible alternative to them . . . we've already paid tuition, I doubt they care about us.

[LSL]

When you think about it, we're freaking out over the specifics of an item on a wishlist that is so certain to be DOA that DOE hasn't even bothered thinking through much of anything.

Not that any of this is NBD, but really, can it be more obvious that they didn't even bother fleshing out details b/c they know the budget as a whole is going nowhere?

To an extent, I agree. But I'm also worried about mid-terms and the signaling from this administration of what they are willing to compromise on.

Very concerned that the administration is willing to compromise on this. I think its important that we let them know how we feel. Particularly in regard to retroactive modification. The higher ed lobby might push hard on keeping certain aspects of IBR/PSLF, but preventing retroactive modification probably isn't a plausible alternative to them . . . we've already paid tuition, I doubt they care about us.

Yeah, this. Sure, this is only a proposal, but if this is the dems proposal, the republican's (and the eventual compromise) will likely be worse. This is of course, if they actually get ANY budget passed, but I mean, they did just pass one and continuing resolutions might be on the back burner with mid-term elections and then 2016 coming up. It's definitely concerning to me even though this is only a proposal. We might just be spinning our wheels on something that never goes anywhere, but to the extent that it seems a lot of people did not think for two fucking seconds to make sure they put something clear together for people who are dependent on PSLF, it's good that we're making noise so they get they should pay attention if and when the time comes for them to try to mess with PSLF.

[dresden doll]

Very concerned that the administration is willing to compromise on this. I think its important that we let them know how we feel. Particularly in regard to retroactive modification. The higher ed lobby might push hard on keeping certain aspects of IBR/PSLF, but preventing retroactive modification probably isn't a plausible alternative to them . . . we've already paid tuition, I doubt they care about us.

Oh, believe me, my elected reps have already been notified. I'm not sanguine at all. It's just kind of lulzy, in a sad way, that DOE is actually being challenged by freaked out students to clarify what the hell they're on about in re: something they clearly just threw out there without thinking through much of anything.

[worldtraveler]

Very concerned that the administration is willing to compromise on this. I think its important that we let them know how we feel. Particularly in regard to retroactive modification. The higher ed lobby might push hard on keeping certain aspects of IBR/PSLF, but preventing retroactive modification probably isn't a plausible alternative to them . . . we've already paid tuition, I doubt they care about us.

Oh, believe me, my elected reps have already been notified. I'm not sanguine at all. It's just kind of lulzy, in a sad way, that DOE is actually being challenged by freaked out students to clarify what the hell they're on about in re: something they clearly just threw out there without thinking through much of anything.

It's also quite clear they either don't give a damn or do not understand the drastic consequences this would have on our lives.

[Tanicius]

Very concerned that the administration is willing to compromise on this. I think its important that we let them know how we feel. Particularly in regard to retroactive modification. The higher ed lobby might push hard on keeping certain aspects of IBR/PSLF, but preventing retroactive modification probably isn't a plausible alternative to them . . . we've already paid tuition, I doubt they care about us.

Oh, believe me, my elected reps have already been notified. I'm not sanguine at all. It's just kind of lulzy, in a sad way, that DOE is actually being challenged by freaked out students to clarify what the hell they're on about in re: something they clearly just threw out there without thinking through much of anything.

It's also quite clear they either don't give a damn or do not understand the drastic consequences this would have on our lives.

My GF emailed the White House about this last week. "Obama" sent her a response that said if she has any concerns about paying her loans, he would encourage her to visit the relevant websites and look into the option of having her loans forgiven after 10 years of public interest work. LOL

[anyriotgirl]

Very concerned that the administration is willing to compromise on this. I think its important that we let them know how we feel. Particularly in regard to retroactive modification. The higher ed lobby might push hard on keeping certain aspects of IBR/PSLF, but preventing retroactive modification probably isn't a plausible alternative to them . . . we've already paid tuition, I doubt they care about us.

Oh, believe me, my elected reps have already been notified. I'm not sanguine at all. It's just kind of lulzy, in a sad way, that DOE is actually being challenged by freaked out students to clarify what the hell they're on about in re: something they clearly just threw out there without thinking through much of anything.

It's also quite clear they either don't give a damn or do not understand the drastic consequences this would have on our lives.

My GF emailed the White House about this last week. "Obama" sent her a response that said if she has any concerns about paying her loans, he would encourage her to visit the relevant websites and look into the option of having her loans forgiven after 10 years of public interest work. LOL

I have never wanted to poast a "thanks obama" gif nonironically before, but this almost put me over the edge