"Nearly 1,000 health care workers have lost their license to practice in Florida because they can’t repay their student loans – a new crackdown potentially putting hundreds out of work, the I-Team found.
The move to suspend health care licenses comes after federal student loan companies spent years lobbying states to adopt laws to punish those who default on student loans by taking away their professional licenses." …
Interesting that a state would actually do this on a large scale, since it will mean less tax revenue and greater government costs relating to the delicensed people who are now unemployable or employable only in lower paying jobs.
To keep my license, I have to certify every year that I am not behind on child support (or that I have no duty to pay it). Sometimes state licensing is the only way to force compliance.
Seems surprising that the woman in the article didn’t try to make a payment plan or discuss her situation with her lender. Also why do they assume there is no consequence for nonpayment? At the minimum they should be required to work out a payment plan with the lender for reinstatement of their license. Personal responsibility has to be a part of it. If you don’t pay your mortgage the bank takes your house, if you don’t pay your auto loan your car is repossessed.
The article mentioned that the state has the right to garnish wages up to 100%, so I was pondering why the state didn’t do that instead. I am guessing it is because the state would have to first take each individual to court before garnishing, but no such requirement exists for the revoking. Court would be prohibitively expensive and time consuming. Revoking of the licenses is the fast and cheap way to get their attention and start a dialog about a repayment plan.
Except now the people who can no longer work in their former licensed job are even less likely to be able to repay. And from the state’s perspective, less likely to be a taxpaying contributor and more likely to be a cost to the state.
Garnishment may have more up front costs, but is less costly in the long run to the state and the lender.
Florida doesn’t have personal income tax.
https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/local-news/i-team-investigates/florida-board-of-health-suspends-hundreds-of-health-care-licenses-over-student-loan-defaults… looks like some relevant facts were omitted regarding how many licenses were actually revoked.
@VPA2019 - the link didn’t work, but I am curious about the article
I am sure the intent is to get the licenses back in good standing as soon as a dialog is opened and/or a payment plan agreed upon. Florida realizes that unemployment is not a money-making situation for anyone.
https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/local-news/i-team-investigates/florida-board-of-health-suspends-hundreds-of-health-care-licenses-over-student-loan-defaults appears to be a correct link for the one in reply #7.
Presumably, the clarification at the top is the relevant part:
I.e. the number who actually lost their licenses is much smaller than the originally reported “nearly 1,000”.
Ah, facts can be such pesky (but important) things.
@ucbalumnus thank you for fixing the link ?
Also, the article claims all these workers will become a drain on the state as they will be unemployed and go on medicaid and other public assistance. Really? Florida doesn’t have expanded medicaid so it is unlikely these workers will go on medicaid. It also doesn’t mean they aren’t otherwise employable.
This only happens when people are in default. It takes 9+ months to go into default plus they receive a notice to make arrangements to pay their student loans or go into a deferment program. There are a lot of issues with student loan repayments, but there are a lot of ways to make it work too.
Yes, there is a major difference between 900 losing their licences, and “between 90 and 120” having their licenses suspended, while the other 800 or so have payment plans.
I wonder if any of these professionals aren’t working purposely?