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

[Tanicius]

http://educatedrisk.org/analysis/ed-fur ... paye-terms

Thanks yo. Official clarification by DoE is that this proposal would not be retroactive whatsoever for current borrowers. Our spouses would still be able to calculate their discretionary income separately, and we'd still have 10-year PSLF eligibility, with no cap.

[worldtraveler]

http://educatedrisk.org/analysis/ed-fur ... paye-terms

Thanks yo. Official clarification by DoE is that this proposal would not be retroactive whatsoever for current borrowers. Our spouses would still be able to calculate their discretionary income separately, and we'd still have 10-year PSLF eligibility, with no cap.

So basically we freaked out for nothing. It's okay. My life needed some excitement.

[kay2016]

http://educatedrisk.org/analysis/ed-fur ... paye-terms

Thanks yo. Official clarification by DoE is that this proposal would not be retroactive whatsoever for current borrowers. Our spouses would still be able to calculate their discretionary income separately, and we'd still have 10-year PSLF eligibility, with no cap.

So basically we freaked out for nothing. It's okay. My life needed some excitement.

So I think if you graduate this year or next year, you should totally be in the clear (at least for this set of changes)..

1Ls (like me) may have a trickier time, and 0Ls could have all these new rules.

[DrStudMuffin]

For a borrower that has some loans prior to July 1, 2015 and some loans after that date, then it could become confusing because some of the loans would subject to the cap while others would not.

As someone who will be in this position, I'm really curious to see what happens here (although either way I won't be banking on uncapped PSLF being available).

[Cal Trask]

So I think if you graduate this year or next year, you should totally be in the clear (at least for this set of changes)..

1Ls (like me) may have a trickier time, and 0Ls could have all these new rules.

From the language I think you should be in the clear.

According to a U.S. Department of Education spokesperson, current borrowers will not be subject to the proposed $57,500 cap on Public Service Loan Forgiveness. This cap will only apply to new borrowers after July 1, 2015 (if legislation mirrors the proposal). Current borrowers will only be subject to the $57,500 cap if they affirmatively opt into the new PAYE program. Borrowers repaying or applying for PAYE right now will not be subject to the cap.

It says current borrowers, so anyone without existing educational debt prior to July 2015 will be subject to the new rules. So those matriculating this fall (and ostensibly those with existing educational debt) would still have the current options available. This may all change, of course.

[kay2016]

For a borrower that has some loans prior to July 1, 2015 and some loans after that date, then it could become confusing because some of the loans would subject to the cap while others would not.

As someone who will be in this position, I'm really curious to see what happens here (although either way I won't be banking on uncapped PSLF being available).

Same... But it would be nice for all of us to have answers (although I am glad for y'all that'll be done by then!)

And Cal,

I hope you're right. It would be silly for me not to be able to consolidate because 6 years of debt is pre 2015 and one year is after. But either way, I'm not holding my breath that they won't change it eventually.

[The Dark Shepard]

So I think if you graduate this year or next year, you should totally be in the clear (at least for this set of changes)..

1Ls (like me) may have a trickier time, and 0Ls could have all these new rules.

From the language I think you should be in the clear.

According to a U.S. Department of Education spokesperson, current borrowers will not be subject to the proposed $57,500 cap on Public Service Loan Forgiveness. This cap will only apply to new borrowers after July 1, 2015 (if legislation mirrors the proposal). Current borrowers will only be subject to the $57,500 cap if they affirmatively opt into the new PAYE program. Borrowers repaying or applying for PAYE right now will not be subject to the cap.

It says current borrowers, so anyone without existing educational debt prior to July 2015 will be subject to the new rules. So those matriculating this fall (and ostensibly those with existing educational debt) would still have the current options available. This may all change, of course.

From the article:

Based on this explanation, it would appear that a current borrower would be able to apply for PAYE with current terms after July 1, 2015 so long as the loans were disbursed prior to July 1, 2015. Thus, current borrowers would be grandfathered-in for the life of their repayment. For a borrower that has some loans prior to July 1, 2015 and some loans after that date, then it could become confusing because some of the loans would subject to the cap while others would not.

:/

[twenty]

Based on this explanation, it would appear that a current borrower would be able to apply for PAYE with current terms after July 1, 2015 so long as the loans were disbursed prior to July 1, 2015. Thus, current borrowers would be grandfathered-in for the life of their repayment. For a borrower that has some loans prior to July 1, 2015 and some loans after that date, then it could become confusing because some of the loans would subject to the cap while others would not.

:/

I don't think that's the DoED talking, I think that's ER. I'd be really surprised if that was actually the case.

[kay2016]

Based on this explanation, it would appear that a current borrower would be able to apply for PAYE with current terms after July 1, 2015 so long as the loans were disbursed prior to July 1, 2015. Thus, current borrowers would be grandfathered-in for the life of their repayment. For a borrower that has some loans prior to July 1, 2015 and some loans after that date, then it could become confusing because some of the loans would subject to the cap while others would not.

:/

I don't think that's the DoED talking, I think that's ER. I'd be really surprised if that was actually the case.

Twenty do you think all would be subject to the cap in this case or none?

[Cal Trask]

That's my thought, sort of in the same way that those with loans originating prior to 2007 are exempt from the current form of PAYE, but even that's not certain since it's anything but a clean analogy.

[swampman]

I don't think that's the DoED talking, I think that's ER. I'd be really surprised if that was actually the case.

This is cleared up in the comments section of that article. Looks like as long as you borrowed your first law school loan before July 1, 2015 then all your LS loans are covered.

[twenty]

My belief is (and this is supported, but certainly not confirmed) that "new borrowers" refers to anyone who does not have a federal loan outstanding on July 1, 2015. I would imagine loans taken after July 2015 would still qualify for old-PAYE and PSLF as long as you have outstanding loans prior to that date.

[Young Marino]

I think as long as no changes are made prior to the 2016-2017 school yr, we should be good especially since nothing Obama proposes doesn't get through the house

[LSL]

FWIW (hopefully not much) here's the House GOP's budget resolution for 2015. I couldn't find any mention of PSLF/IBR, but maybe others will have more success. Here's some "fuck you public service and poor students" stuff though:

Page 51:

Eliminate the Corporation for National and Community Service. Programs administered out of this
agency provide funding to students and others who work in certain areas of public service. Participation
in these programs is not based on need. The United States has a long history of robust volunteer work
and other efforts that provide services to communities and individuals. Americans’ generosity in
contributing their time and money to these efforts is extraordinary and should be encouraged. However,
the federal government already has aid programs focused on low-income students, and paying
volunteers is not a core federal responsibility, especially in times of high deficits and debt. Further, it is
much more efficient to have such efforts operate at the state and local level by the community that
receives the benefit of the service.

I like how this paragraph goes out of its way not to mention that the CNCS oversees a little known program called Americorps. Not sure whether they'd give Americorps to another agency, but I think we all know where we can hedge our bets.

page 52

Accept the Fiscal Commission’s Proposal to Eliminate In-School Interest Subsidies for Undergraduate
Students. The federal government focuses aid decisions on family income prior to a student’s enrollment
and then provides a number of repayment protections and, in some cases, loan forgiveness after
graduation. There is no evidence that in-school interest subsidies are critical to individual matriculation.

page 75

Elimination of Student-Loan Repayment for Government Employees. The budget assumes discretionary
savings by eliminating the repayment by the government of student loans for federal employees.

But hey, Paul Ryan really does care about the students.

[Nomo]

http://educatedrisk.org/analysis/ed-fur ... paye-terms

Thanks yo. Official clarification by DoE is that this proposal would not be retroactive whatsoever for current borrowers. Our spouses would still be able to calculate their discretionary income separately, and we'd still have 10-year PSLF eligibility, with no cap.

So basically we freaked out for nothing. It's okay. My life needed some excitement.

I'm still not sure we should be putting so much faith into what Educated Risk is saying. I don't see any direct quotes from Dep. of Education, or anything indicating who the spokesman was. I'm still assuming Dep. of Education has no idea what it is they've proposed.

[Young Marino]

FWIW (hopefully not much) here's the House GOP's budget resolution for 2015. I couldn't find any mention of PSLF/IBR, but maybe others will have more success. Here's some "fuck you public service and poor students" stuff though:

Page 51:

Eliminate the Corporation for National and Community Service. Programs administered out of this
agency provide funding to students and others who work in certain areas of public service. Participation
in these programs is not based on need. The United States has a long history of robust volunteer work
and other efforts that provide services to communities and individuals. Americans’ generosity in
contributing their time and money to these efforts is extraordinary and should be encouraged. However,
the federal government already has aid programs focused on low-income students, and paying
volunteers is not a core federal responsibility, especially in times of high deficits and debt. Further, it is
much more efficient to have such efforts operate at the state and local level by the community that
receives the benefit of the service.

I like how this paragraph goes out of its way not to mention that the CNCS oversees a little known program called Americorps. Not sure whether they'd give Americorps to another agency, but I think we all know where we can hedge our bets.

page 52

Accept the Fiscal Commission’s Proposal to Eliminate In-School Interest Subsidies for Undergraduate
Students. The federal government focuses aid decisions on family income prior to a student’s enrollment
and then provides a number of repayment protections and, in some cases, loan forgiveness after
graduation. There is no evidence that in-school interest subsidies are critical to individual matriculation.

page 75

Elimination of Student-Loan Repayment for Government Employees. The budget assumes discretionary
savings by eliminating the repayment by the government of student loans for federal employees.

But hey, Paul Ryan really does care about the students.

See, this is what kind of scares me. The GOP (Greedy Old People) are all about gutting PSLF and Obama is willing to compromise on it. It's looking like the republicans are going to gain the majority in the Senate after the mid term elections so now we're even more fucked. If the above comments are true in that the proposed PSLF cap would only apply to NEW borrowers, we have nothing to worry about but just for good measure, I'd like to see nothing passed regarding loan forgiveness before the 2017-2018 school year. Remember that PSLF is mentioned as a clause in the loan promissory notes when we sign for them so for the gov to revoke it would be unprecedented.

[Cal Trask]

Page 51:

Eliminate the Corporation for National and Community Service. Programs administered out of this
agency provide funding to students and others who work in certain areas of public service. Participation
in these programs is not based on need. The United States has a long history of robust volunteer work
and other efforts that provide services to communities and individuals. Americans’ generosity in
contributing their time and money to these efforts is extraordinary and should be encouraged. However,
the federal government already has aid programs focused on low-income students, and paying
volunteers is not a core federal responsibility, especially in times of high deficits and debt. Further, it is
much more efficient to have such efforts operate at the state and local level by the community that
receives the benefit of the service.

I like how this paragraph goes out of its way not to mention that the CNCS oversees a little known program called Americorps. Not sure whether they'd give Americorps to another agency, but I think we all know where we can hedge our bets.

This is baffling. What do they plan to do with Americorps, specifically VISTA, if they cut out the CNCS? This whole paragraph is just so ignorant of the entire program.

[LSL]

Page 51:

Eliminate the Corporation for National and Community Service. Programs administered out of this
agency provide funding to students and others who work in certain areas of public service. Participation
in these programs is not based on need. The United States has a long history of robust volunteer work
and other efforts that provide services to communities and individuals. Americans’ generosity in
contributing their time and money to these efforts is extraordinary and should be encouraged. However,
the federal government already has aid programs focused on low-income students, and paying
volunteers is not a core federal responsibility, especially in times of high deficits and debt. Further, it is
much more efficient to have such efforts operate at the state and local level by the community that
receives the benefit of the service.

I like how this paragraph goes out of its way not to mention that the CNCS oversees a little known program called Americorps. Not sure whether they'd give Americorps to another agency, but I think we all know where we can hedge our bets.

This is baffling. What do they plan to do with Americorps, specifically VISTA, if they cut out the CNCS? This whole paragraph is just so ignorant of the entire program.

My guess is nothing. That said, I don't have any reason to believe that item isn't DOA to Obama and the Dem controlled Senate. It's just a stupid, ridiculous paragraph that seemed worthy of pointing out since alot of people here (and generally across America) like Americorps.

[Young Marino]

Page 51:

Eliminate the Corporation for National and Community Service. Programs administered out of this
agency provide funding to students and others who work in certain areas of public service. Participation
in these programs is not based on need. The United States has a long history of robust volunteer work
and other efforts that provide services to communities and individuals. Americans’ generosity in
contributing their time and money to these efforts is extraordinary and should be encouraged. However,
the federal government already has aid programs focused on low-income students, and paying
volunteers is not a core federal responsibility, especially in times of high deficits and debt. Further, it is
much more efficient to have such efforts operate at the state and local level by the community that
receives the benefit of the service.

I like how this paragraph goes out of its way not to mention that the CNCS oversees a little known program called Americorps. Not sure whether they'd give Americorps to another agency, but I think we all know where we can hedge our bets.

This is baffling. What do they plan to do with Americorps, specifically VISTA, if they cut out the CNCS? This whole paragraph is just so ignorant of the entire program.

My guess is nothing. That said, I don't have any reason to believe that item isn't DOA to Obama and the Dem controlled Senate. It's just a stupid, ridiculous paragraph that seemed worthy of pointing out since alot of people here (and generally across America) like Americorps.

Can we all agree to vote Dem in 2016? Unless Chris Christy is running of course lol

[Tiago Splitter]

Man Obama has it good. Proposes to seriously curtail PSLF, Republicans get shit on.

[LSL]

Man Obama has it good. Proposes to seriously curtail PSLF, Republicans get shit on.

Based on his past attitude toward loan forgiveness, do you have any reason to believe Ryan wouldn't go for that line in Obama's budget? That's why everyone else is concerned that the democrats were budging: because it's not really a question for the republicans. Also, at 24 pages, I think we've crapped on Obama's budget plenty ITT.

[twenty]

Elimination of Student-Loan Repayment for Government Employees. The budget assumes discretionary
savings by eliminating the repayment by the government of student loans for federal employees.

[cinephile]

I don't think that's the DoED talking, I think that's ER. I'd be really surprised if that was actually the case.

This is cleared up in the comments section of that article. Looks like as long as you borrowed your first law school loan before July 1, 2015 then all your LS loans are covered.

Why would that just be law school, though? Wouldn't it be ANY federal direct loan? Like if you had undergrad stafford loans prior to July 1st, 2015, it seems like it would count because you wouldn't be a new borrower.

[The Dark Shepard]

And they try to paint Obama as a "liberal"

[kay2016]

Finally got a response from my Senator (R), he seemed bothered by the idea and said that it was likely to come up in Appropriations and such.. But no real help as we figured