Home > 2013 > Students

5 Ways Student Loans Hurt Middle-Class Kids

Advertiser Disclosure Comments 2 Comments

Student loans are supposed to help middle-class kids pay for a college education, but these days they can do more harm than good. It’s high time we did something about that.

If you imagine a world where the federal government and private lenders actually partner with students, instead of treating them as a profit center, have I got a bridge investment deal for you. As things stand, the Affordable Care Act has a better shot of garnering support among Tea Party activists than the average American kid has of getting a good deal on a college education.

Riddle me this: Why should middle-class students pay more for loans than is absolutely necessary, all the while padding the government’s coffers and enabling state universities to build facilities that the students will only get to use for four years?

The answer: they shouldn’t.

While no doubt there are more, here are five instances where middle-class kids are getting hosed on their student loans and student loan debt.

1. The $50 Billion Heist

As Washington prepares for another epic battle over keeping federal Stafford loan rates at 3.4 percent rather than allowing them to double to 6.8 percent, an important fact goes overlooked: Stafford loans are already a significant profit center for the feds. Indeed, these loans earn Uncle Sam some 36 cents for every dollar it puts out. Bottom line: the government will reap $50.6 billion in profit from federal student loans in 2013 alone.

So instead of arguing for weeks over whether we should hold the line on Stafford interest rates, perhaps the debate is better focused on how we might cut them to a level sufficient to cover administrative costs and provide a slight cushion. That should help to make college more affordable for the middle class.

2. Student Loans Fund Tuition Inflation

Average college debt has grown from $9,188 in 1993 to $35,200 now.

Here’s the dirty little secret why colleges and universities charge so much: Because they can. Their operating budgets are funded largely by student loans, which are repaid by students themselves. So why not pay your college president $3 million a year, spend $194 million to build or renovate a football stadium or “invest” $70 million in a pool?

Experts have suggested a panoply of solutions, including capping the maximum loan amount available to people who plan to pursue low-paying majors such as art history, or making student loans pay for education only, and not facilities like dorms, arenas or sports stadiums. (Credit.com contributor Mitchell Weiss explores more ideas along these lines.)

Whatever the solution, we have to stop this crazy cycle before it shuts the middle class out of college entirely.

3. Till Death Do Us Part…Really!

You can never shake student loans, because unlike other types of loans they cannot be discharged in bankruptcy (with a few rare exceptions). It doesn’t matter if you get laid off, are financially devastated by the illness or death of the family breadwinner or take up residence in your car. Student lenders will hound you until your last breath or they are repaid, whichever comes first.

This change to the bankruptcy laws was originally conceived to protect taxpayers, who otherwise would be on the hook if (and when) borrowers default on federal loans. After years of aggressive lobbying, private lenders eventually won the same benefit, i.e., they have the same risk of not getting repaid: Essentially zero. Yet they still charge a premium.

In addition to being a Credit.com contributor, Weiss is a finance professor at University of Hartford and says he regularly counsels students whose private loans boast 12% or 15% interest rates. The same loan from the government costs a quarter of the price.

It’s the cornerstone of credit that interest rates are based on risk: the higher the risk that a borrower won’t pay a debt, the higher his or her interest rate. Private lenders flout this rule, pumping more money into the higher education system and driving tuition inflation.

Maybe it’s time for private lenders to play by the rules. Lending means risk. If they are unwilling to accept that risk, perhaps they should open a chain of newsstands.

4. Limited Tax Benefit

When you get a mortgage, the federal government allows you to deduct the interest on your taxes to help incentivize homeownership. Having a well-educated population is no less important to our nation’s future than buying a house. We should demand that student loans get the same tax treatment.

Currently, only people who earn below $75,000 can write off a portion of their student loan interest. That’s a problem. If you graduated from an expensive school, you may owe $100,000 or more in student debt — as much as many mortgages. But even if you get a good-paying job, you could face a crippling student loan payment every month. It’s a slippery slope from there to a tepid economy, because if all of your money is going to pay rent and service student loan debt, you’re not going to be in a position to buy a house, a car, and/or all the other things that put “consumer” into our consumer economy.

Let’s change this, and give student loans the same tax benefits that apply to mortgages.

5. Forbearance = Tightening the Screws

Many people who are having trouble paying their student loans mistakenly assume that forbearance is just another word for free. Weiss says he works with students all the time who believe all they have to do is fill out a form, and their payments magically go away.

In fact, forbearance can cost student loan borrowers a great deal of money. The entire time their loans are in forbearance, the interest keeps accruing, and is being added to the principal. Over time, that can make even small loans balloon into Behemoths. In many cases, forbearance is the only option most private student lenders offer distressed borrowers, even though they can offer other alternatives like loan restructure or modification. But hey, why would they when bankruptcy rules essentially guarantee full repayment? Clearly, this needs to change.

First, eliminating the “Render to Caesar what is Caesar’s” lending environment and allowing student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy will bring private student lenders to the bargaining table, cause them to offer a host of reasonable options and force everyone to make smarter choices.

Second, let’s expand the Pay As You Earn Repayment (PAYER) plan, the federal program that in many cases caps monthly student loan payments to a percentage of the borrower’s income. We should include all private loans, as well as borrowers who are seriously behind on their payments. These are precisely the people in most dire need of help.

America has always been the land of “What’s next?” Washington’s failure to adequately address suffocating student debt, where few have had any incentive to act differently, represents “what was,” cripples millions of Americans and stifles economic growth.

This is an op-ed contribution to Credit.com and does not necessarily represent the views of the company.

Image: Fuse

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

  • Craig

    This is a good article overall. I agree with your premises, especially #2, but except for #4, which I believe contradicts #2. Here is why: If there is a tax benefit to student loans similar to home ownership, that will distort the cost of college in the same way that the mortgage interest deduction distorts the housing market. It will fund college inflation the same way that the mortgage interest deduction results in inflation of housing prices. The mortgage interest deduction does not incentivize home ownership, it incentivizes taking on more debt to be a home owner. This is why organizations that claim it is good for home buyers also claim, in ironic contradiction, that without it home sellers would experience signicant drops in the price they could sell their homes for (the deduction inflates prices). Go house shopping, hem and haw about whether you can afford the monthly payments on a particular house that you like if you increase your offer price, and your real estate agent will very likely respond “Don’t forget about the mortgage interest deduction.” Likewise, providing a tax deduction for college loans is little different than the government providing lower-than-market tuition rates (even if could make them lower than they are): It is still a subsidy that could drive many to take on more debt than they should.

  • Bob Miller

    I am a parent of two college graduates. I own a small business and because I made to much money we had to take out private loans with variable rates. I see where some people think this is wrong, if you can’t afford college don’t go. Why should they be denied a college education when others get government help? My concern is the variable rates? There is no cap as to how high they can go? If they go to 12,15% or higher they will never be paid off so I would say just stop paying them. There is no help for people like us, and the governments has forced us into this situation. The sad part is, it took my my son 2.5 years to find a full time job. It took my daughter, a certified teacher, 1.5 years and it is not in her field. My advice is to not go to college, find a job paying minimum wage, which is what you will end up with if you did finish college, and attend school at night to earn your degree. It may take you some time, but you won’t owe thousands of dollars when you graduate

  • Pingback: Millennials’ Student Loan Debt Up 76% in Just 5 Years | Best Credit Repair()

  • Pingback: Huhhh’z Da $7,000 Masta’z Degree Dat’z Scarn' Collegez | Oklahoma Sentinal()

  • Pingback: Consumer Credit Up, But Credit Card Usage Down | Best Credit Repair()

  • Pingback: The $7,000 Master’s Degree Is Scaring Colleges | BaciNews()

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team