Dipping my toe into the politics forum. I think this topic isn’t that political but probably too political for the cafe.
I was reading on Reddit. The topic was should I hire a nanny or use daycare. Daycare being cheaper.
The couple’s income was $230,000 a year. She was a medical fellow and her husband was in private equity. In the post, she has $250,000 in med school loans and will be eligible for PSLF. When she becomes an attending, she will be 7 years into repayment. As you are on an income based repayment schedule, her payments will be small for 7 years and bigger for 3. Then all will be forgiven. As I know a couple on this schedule they file married filing separately so only the person’s income on the PLSF schedule is counted.
I wonder about the use of PLSF. Is it for physicians making a high income or should there be some guardrails on the type of school debt and profession that is eligible?
Do you feel that it’s a good use of your tax dollars? Do you think the new administration will change student loan forgiveness?
I guess I feel that maybe someone whose big decision is trying to decide that paying $4000 a month for a nanny and married to a PE spouse is not a good use of this law. And my tax dollars.
I understand your points, but if doctors meet all the PSLF requirements I don’t have any issues with forgiving the rest of their loans. Without PSLF certain areas/hospitals would find it difficult to get doctors to work there.
No, it’s probably the exception rather than the rule though. My daughter, a middle school teacher, is probably closer to the median PSLF program participant as far as income is concerned.
Should there be limits on location? The person and people I know who are doing PLSF are working in major east coast cities where I don’t think there is a shortage of finding physicians for that location.
I have a family member who is a physician living in a rural area that desperately needs specialists and also primary care. They cannot get young physicians out of fellowship to move there.
I wonder is PLSF should be for those areas where they can’t recruit physicians for.
The person I know doing PLSF is very close to the person who I referenced. Will have their loans forgiven after 3 years of being an attending and married to another professional.
That person and many of their physician friends. Two professional couples.
I’m not saying all those doing PLSF but I wonder if there should be more restrictions. Because I feel that the law is for teachers teaching in low income schools. Not maybe physicians working in desirable places.
Of course, the reason for including physicians in PSLF is that the US medical education debt load is so high that US medical school graduates are incentivized to chase money just to keep ahead of their debt. It is no surprise that the lower paid specialties (including primary care ones) have high percentages of immigrants who got their medical education outside of the US with much lower debt load on themselves, while US medical school graduates strongly favor the higher paid specialties.
I don’t think so. It’s not all that easy to meet all the PSLF requirements, so again, I don’t have a problem with honoring the commitment of that deal.
One thing I learned working in financial aid is that every program will have some people receiving benefits who seem like they shouldn’t. For example, people who have their own businesses can write off so much that their AGI results in Pell - but they are not actually poor. The thing is, that’s the exception rather than the norm. PSLF is the same way - some who qualify seemingly should not. Again, it’s the exception rather than the norm.
There are so many people working in jobs that qualify for PSLF who are low income, but the work they do benefits society. It’s also artists, museum workers, workers in the nonprofit sector, public defenders … to name just a few of the jobs that benefit from PSLF. I really do think that it’s a good use of tax dollars.
As for the future of PSLF, I do believe that there will be a push to get rid of it. I always warned my students that the program could go away at any time. I would hope that those currently in the program could finish up if it is actually discontinued, but of course, there’s no guarantee.
Some borrowers may be eligible to “buy back” months of PSLF credit for time spent in forbearance as a result of the court’s injunction. Borrowers with 120 months of eligible employment can buy back (make payments to cover) past months that were not originally counted as qualifying payments because the borrower was in an ineligible deferment or forbearance status. Borrowers must submit a buyback request and make an extra payment of at least as much as what they would have owed under an income-driven repayment (IDR) plan during the months they are trying to buy back.
Borrowers can buy back these months only if
they still have an outstanding balance on their loan(s),
they have approved qualifying employment for these same months, and
buying back these months will complete their total of 120 qualifying PSLF payments.
Note: Borrowers who have consolidation loans can buy back months only on the current consolidation loan. These borrowers can’t buy back months from the loans included in the consolidation loan or for any period prior to the first disbursement date of a consolidation loan.
Enroll in a different PSLF-eligible repayment plan
Borrowers can apply to enroll in a different PSLF-eligible repayment plan. We encourage borrowers to look at the specific terms of each plan to make the best choice for their individual situation. See above for more information. Different IDR plans may require higher monthly payments than the SAVE Plan does, and—in the case of some IDR plans—borrowers who later leave them may face interest capitalization (where unpaid interest is added to the principal balance). However, payments made under these IDR plans will count toward forgiveness under IDR and PSLF.
do you have any data to support that? Don’t docs in underserved areas have other forgiveness programs?
IMO, absolutely not. No grad/professional loans would qualify (If I were in charge).
Possible, probably too far down in the weeds. Plus, Congress would have to change the law when there are much bigger fish to go after.
I agree with that, but where I woudl differ is that those jobs don’t require degrees that cost well over six figures. Master’s degrees at some private schools are cash cows. USC (SoCal) used to offer a Masters in Social Work that cost $100k, all of which was loans, unless someone was wealthy. Columbia offers a plethora of Master’s programs, nearly all of which are full pay.
IMO, PSLF is benefitting Big Education more than the students.
However, according to the above linked page, PSLF for physicians limits the jobs only to non-profit or government employers, which can be plentiful even in non-underserved areas, so there is not a strong push to work in an underserved area. Indeed, if an underserved area is mainly served by a for-profit hospital and small private practices, there may not be much in the way of PSLF-eligible employment for physicians there.
S1 and DIL are both replaying their loans under this program, and they both have ~3 years to go. They are both psychologists with Psy.D. degrees and they both work for the state. DIL evaluates children who have been referred to the foster care system and S1 evaluates children/adolescents who have had an encounter with the juvenile justice system. Both do important work that doesn’t pay hugely, and they are counting heavily on this program continuing. It is very veryvery important for their long-term financial plans.
Has the program changed? I have two extended family members who did this program ( or I think it was this program); they both had to work in underserved areas, I thought. One worked on a Native American reservation for 3 years. The other was married and had young children and was lucky to find a clinic role in an area with a large recent low-income immigrant population but also with career opportunities for her spouse (who also had educational loans and was just starting out).
Maybe I misunderstand, but my understanding (and I know very little about student loans) is that : The SAVE Plan is considered a qualifying repayment plan for PSLF.
All borrowers in that plan are currently on forbearance, and it doesn’t count toward the 120 payments. There are online conversations about it, calling it SAVE purgatory. There are more than a few people who are near 120 who are on SAVE because the servicers have not acted quickly enough to move them to another plan, or they have finally been moved but lost months while things dragged on. The solution seems to be buyback.