Student Loan Blog : National Council of Higher Education Loan Programs

Federal Student Loan Lenders Fight for Survival

Student Loan Girl — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 23:52:00 GMT

In what is being viewed as a direct hit to private third-party lenders in the Federal Family Education Loan Program who are fighting to keep the program alive, the U.S. Department of Education’s preliminary data paints the FFEL program as a costly and ineffective system with a 7.3-percent student loan default rate, two whole points higher than the default rate for the Direct Loan Program (“Private Lenders Brace for Fight Over Student-Loan Role,” The Wall Street Journal, March 27, 2009).

Since its launch in the 1960s, FFELP has been the primary source of federal student loans. This year the FFEL program has already lent more than $56 billion in student loans, while the Direct Loan Program has lent just $20 billion. But President Obama has proposed axing the FFEL program, which costs the federal government billions of dollars in subsidies each year, in favor of the government’s Direct Loan Program, through which families borrow directly from the government.

FFELP lenders have said that the Education Department’s untimely release of the student loan default rate data — taken from fiscal year 2007 — was purely political since the government has never released preliminary default rate data and has never broken down the data by the two programs. Industry analysts say the data reflects the differences in the two programs: FFELP lenders typically cater to more students from for-profit schools who tend to default at a higher rate than students in the Direct Loan Program.

Department of Education officials have said they released the data in response to a U.S. Freedom of Information Act request from The Wall Street Journal and inquiries from Congressional leaders.

“It’s unfortunate the rates are being released before there is an analysis of them,” said Brett Lief, president of the National Council of Higher Education Loan Programs, a trade group that represents FFELP lenders and federal loan guarantee agencies. “This is very serious stuff and I’m saddened that it has come out like this.”

No Cut-and-Dry Solution to the FFELP Dilemma

While the Consumer Bankers Association, which represents certain FFELP lenders, has sent Congress a 2,500-signature petition asking legislators to reject the president’s proposal to eliminate the FFEL program, industry observers don’t see the battle over FFELP ending quickly or simply.

The Congressional Budget Office has said eliminating the program would save the government nearly $100 billion over the next 10 years, which President Obama plans to redirect to the Federal Pell Grant program. This potential funding boost for Pell Grants, which are awarded to the nation’s neediest students, could make it harder for legislators who support FFELP to successfully argue to keep the program alive.

However, some legislators who oppose the FFEL program face strong opposition from their home-state guarantee agencies that work with FFELP lenders to service college loans for students in their state. Legislators may also have to battle student loan giant Sallie Mae, which has said that keeping certain elements of FFELP might actually make it possible for the government to draw additional Pell Grant funding from FFELP itself. Sallie Mae has also pointed out that its borrowers, who partake in default prevention programs through state loan-guarantee agencies, are 30 percent less likely to default than direct loan borrowers.

“It’s certainly possible Congress would eliminate the program,” said Terry Hartle, a senior vice president of the American Council of Education, a trade group representing colleges and universities. “But it’s equally possible — and perhaps more so — to wring more savings out of the [FFEL] program and put the savings into Pell.”

Share this post: email this | del.icio.us | reddit

Nonprofit Lenders Hurt by Legislation Intended to Help Them

Student Loan Girl — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 01:53:00 GMT

Legislation that went into effect in October with the College Cost Reduction and Access Act cut federal subsidies to for-profit student loan lenders partly in an attempt to give nonprofit lenders a more competitive edge in the student loan market.

But as lenders continue to scale back or suspend their student loan programs amid a troubled economy and now-unprofitable federal education loans, newer legislation designed to help struggling lenders — nonprofit student loan providers in particular — may be doing more harm than good, writes Paul Basken in The Chronicle of Higher Education (“Federal Rescue Plan May Have Overlooked Nonprofit Lenders,” Aug. 1, 2008).

Government Positioned to Provide Lenders With Funds … But Only If Funds Are Already There

When it became clear that skittish investors, burned by the collapse of subprime credit markets, would no longer buy lender’s student loan portfolios in the secondary market, the government responded by passing the Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act in May, allowing the Department of Education to purchase federal student loans from lenders or to use a lender’s student loan portfolio as collateral for a low-interest line of credit. Both provisions were intended to provide lenders with the needed capital to make new loans, which investors were no longer providing.

The continuing credit crunch, however, has hit nonprofit lenders so hard that they lack the liquidity to even begin issuing new student loans; without new loans, these lenders have nothing to sell or offer as collateral to the Education Department.

Peter Warren, executive vice president of the Education Finance Council, an association of nonprofit lenders, suggests that the recent legislation, by leaving nonprofit lenders still unable to bankroll federal student loans, has not done its job of shoring up the student loan market.

“You need to have access to funds in order to play in this game,” Warren says. “It’s essentially a Catch-22.”

Lower Interest Rates Cripple Lenders

Nonprofit lenders’ inability to secure capital has been even further aggravated by the recent drop in interest rates brought about by the subprime mortgage crisis, which has left student-loan lenders with a “negative subsidy” rate.

As Basken explains, lenders are now actually in the position of having to pay interest to the government on each unsubsidized student loan they issue, since the fixed 6.8-percent interest rate on these student loans is higher than current market rates. Meanwhile, lenders may not be receiving any corresponding principal or interest income from student loan borrowers, who aren’t required to make payments on these federal student loans while they’re in school at least half time.

These lenders, says Shelly Repp, general counsel for the National Council of Higher Education Loan Programs, simply “don’t have enough working capital to carry all the expenditures they’re expected to make.”

In response to the ongoing liquidity issues facing nonprofit lenders, lawmakers are pushing the federal government to come up with new solutions quickly, calling for a hearing next month to consider new options for student loan providers and asking President Bush to offer additional help to nonprofit lenders.

Share this post: email this | del.icio.us | reddit

With Government’s Help, Lenders Returning to Federal Student Loan Market

Student Loan Girl — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 21:08:00 GMT

A number of lenders who abandoned the federal student loan market in recent months may be returning, in light of a new law designed to keep struggling lenders afloat, according to a Dow Jones Newswires article.

Many of the 102 companies that scaled back or withdrew from the Federal Family Education Loan Program, in which federal student loans are funded by private lenders, are expected to at least consider returning to the program for the 2008–09 academic year, writes Dow Jones reporter Melissa Korn (“Student Lenders Tiptoe Back to Market With Government Bailout,” June 4, 2008).

Brett Lief, president of the National Council of Higher Education Loan Programs, said every one of the lenders in his organization "changed their policies" during the credit crunch earlier this year — reducing or suspending their participation in the FFEL program. The 60 FFELP lenders that are members of the NCHELP reported that the changes were necessary because federal student loans were no longer profitable.

But after Congress passed the Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act (HR 5715), which gives the U.S. Department of Education the authority to buy student loans from lenders who have been unable to sell them, those lenders are “all reviewing their policies again,” Lief said.

Before the passage of the act, Sallie Mae, one of the nation’s largest originators of federal student loans, was considering whether to remain in the FFEL program, and Nelnet, NorthStar Education Finance, Inc., and the Kentucky Higher Education Assistance Authority had left the FFEL program.

Under the new legislation, all four of these lenders have reaffirmed they will continue to issue new federal student loans. However, some lenders still question whether the government changes will ultimately be profitable despite the Education Department’s infusion of liquidity, while other lending banks, like Citibank, JPMorgan Chase, PNC, and SunTrust, remain unmoved.

These banks no longer offer student loans to certain colleges — schools that they have determined tend toward higher default rates, fewer borrowers, and smaller loan amounts that make business less profitable.

Share this post: email this | del.icio.us | reddit

New York Probe on the Student Loan Industry

Student Loan Girl — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 00:14:00 GMT

On Nov. 7, 2006 Andrew Cuomo was elected the 64th attorney general of the state of New York, and shortly thereafter launched a nationwide investigation into student loan practices at more than 400 universities across the nation, including some of the Ivy Leagues.

According to a March 15, 2007 article briefing titled “NY State Attorney General Releases Results of Probe on College Loan Industry,” that appeared in the National Council of Higher Education Loan Programs Inc.’s Daily Briefing, “Cuomo issued results of his nationwide investigation into the college loan industry that revealed ‘deceptive’ practices.”

It is important to remember that not ALL lenders or university financial aid officers have been implicated in this investigation. Although Cuomo’s office has not revealed the specific colleges it has been investigating, it has said it is focusing on Sallie Mae and Nelnet.

Preferred Lender Lists Questioned

According to the Daily Briefing, “The investigation revealed the following industry practices, which Cuomo says are ‘problematic’: Establishment of so-called ‘preferred lender’ lists without disclosing the basis for selection or the specific benefits associated with these preferred lenders; revenue sharing and other financial arrangements between schools and lenders; denials or impediments to a student or parent’s choice of lender based on the borrower’s selection of a particular lender or guaranty agency; impediments to competition in the lending industry that stifle better loan terms for students and parents.”

On the New York State Web site, http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2007/mar/mar15a_07.html, it is reported that “Cuomo notified over 400 colleges and universities throughout the country, including all in New York state, to end relationships with lenders that have the potential to mislead students and compromise their ability to obtain the best rate for their student loans.”

The letter also included the following points as being problematic in the student loan industry:

“Lenders pay financial kickbacks to schools based on a percentage of the loans that are directed to the lenders. The kickbacks are designed to be larger if a school directs more student loans to the lender. And the kickbacks are even greater if the schools make the lender their ‘exclusive’ preferred lender.
Lenders pay for all-expense-paid trips for financial aid officers (and their spouses) to high-end resorts like Pebble Beach, as well as other exotic locations in the Caribbean and elsewhere. Lenders also provide schools with other benefits like computer systems and put representatives from schools on their advisory boards in order to further curry favor with the schools.
Lenders set up funds and credit lines for schools to use in exchange for schools putting the lenders on their preferred lender lists.
Lenders offer large payments to schools to drop out of the direct federal loan program so that the lenders get more business.
Lenders set up call centers for schools. When students call the schools’ financial aid centers, they actually get representatives of the lenders.
Lenders on preferred lender lists agree to sell loans to a single lender so there is actually no real choice for the student.
Lenders sell loans to other lenders, often wiping out the back-end benefits originally promised to the students without the students ever knowing.”

What’s Next for the Investigation?

The Daily Briefing explained, “The Attorney General’s press statement does not indicate the future direction of their investigation, except to say the investigation is continuing.”

Students can finance their federal student loans through any lender that participates in the Federal Family Education Loan Program, including NextStudent. Make sure to look for a lender with aggressive benefits. NextStudent offers some of the best benefits in the business, including a 1 percent LOCKED interest rate reduction after the first 36 on-time payments.

Talk to the education financial advisors at NextStudent. They have all the information and advice you need on student loans. Check out www.nextstudent.com.

Also, be sure to tune in next Monday for my next blog on student loan issues in the news.

Student Loan Girl

Share this post: email this | del.icio.us | reddit