Government to Require In-School Repayment of Federal Student Loans
zencollegelife.com
Government to Require In-School Repayment of Federal Student Loans
1–10 of 10 posts
Re: Government to Require In-School Repayment of Federal Student Loans
#2Don't like it - shop around.
Oh Wait. Sorry - .GOV now runs the whole show.
Re: Government to Require In-School Repayment of Federal Student Loans
#3Contrary to its title, this article does not say that the government will require in-school repayment of student loans. It only says the gov't will offer a tax credit if the student opts to do so.
Re: Government to Require In-School Repayment of Federal Student Loans
#4Don't like it - shop around. Oh Wait. Sorry - .GOV now runs the whole show.
Oh Wait. Sorry - the title is sensationalist lies.
Re: Government to Require In-School Repayment of Federal Student Loans
#5Don't like it - shop around. Oh Wait. Sorry - .GOV now runs the whole show.
There's nothing preventing other loans -- they just won't have the federal subsidy.
(If someone's reasons were good for deferring repayment while getting further education -- and thus they're still a good credit risk at prevailing private interest rates -- a private bridge/refinancing option will emerge.)
Re: Government to Require In-School Repayment of Federal Student Loans
#6Contrary to its title, this article does not say that the government will require in-school repayment of student loans. It only says the gov't will offer a tax credit if the student opts to do so.
Can you or anyone else point to a better source for this. My wife and I are still in school and this directly affects us.
Re: Government to Require In-School Repayment of Federal Student Loans
#7Don't like it - shop around. Oh Wait. Sorry - .GOV now runs the whole show.
There's nothing preventing other loans -- they just won't have the federal subsidy. (If someone's reasons were good for deferring repayment while getting further education -- and thus they're still a good credit risk at prevailing private interest rates -- a private bridge/refinancing option will emerge.)
Non subsidized loans are almost impossible to obtain at anything remotely close to the rate the subsidized loans offer. The best I was offered was 15%. At that point it makes more sense to just not go to school.
Unsecured debt like student loans has incredible risks and the laws in the US aren't very strong in favor of forcing people to repay so a lot choose to just ignore the loans causing them to be even riskier and screwing it for the people who plays fair. Eliminating the subsidy without looking at everything else in play here is dangerous.
Re: Government to Require In-School Repayment of Federal Student Loans
#8Contrary to its title, this article does not say that the government will require in-school repayment of student loans. It only says the gov't will offer a tax credit if the student opts to do so.
The article says that students will have to start paying the interest on their loans while in school, and will then get a tax credit for it.
Re: Government to Require In-School Repayment of Federal Student Loans
#9Aside from the inaccuracy of the title, it's also worth noting that the law referred to in the article was enacted in 2007 under Pres. Bush.
Re: Government to Require In-School Repayment of Federal Student Loans
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing preventing other loans -- they just won't have the federal subsidy. (If someone's reasons were good for deferring repayment while getting further education -- and thus they're still a good credit risk at prevailing private interest rates -- a private bridge/refinancing option will emerge.)
Non subsidized loans are almost impossible to obtain at anything remotely close to the rate the subsidized loans offer. The best I was offered was 15%. At that point it makes more sense to just not go to school. Unsecured debt like student loans has incredible risks and the laws in the US aren't very strong in favor of forcing people to repay so a lot choose to just ignore the loans causing them to be even riskier an…
Except the subsidy isn't going away -- it's just being limited to the feds' own Department of Education loan program, which will then mea less diversity in process/administration.
I doubt that will mean loan policies become more stingy; being stingy (even when required by a clear-eyed cost-benefit analysis) is not what the feds are good at.